Who Wants The Us Constitution Rewritten?

There have been growing efforts to rewrite the US Constitution, with some arguing that it is the only way to achieve substantial reform. This would be done through a constitutional convention, as outlined in Article V of the Constitution, which governs how to amend the document. To hold a convention, two-thirds of state legislatures (34) must petition Congress. While this has never been successfully done, there have been approximately 400 petitions over the years, and advocates claim to be close to the required number. However, critics argue that this could put the basics of American democracy at risk, as there are no rules or safeguards in the Constitution for an Article V convention, meaning no part of the Constitution would be off-limits.

Explore related products

Constitution and Reform in Eighteenth-Century Poland: The Constitution of 3 May 1791

$70

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99 $6.95

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Citizens Divided: Campaign Finance Reform and the Constitution (The Tanner Lectures on Human Values)

$19.84 $32

Perfecting the U.S. Constitution: 27 and Counting, The Amendments that Shaped America’s Future (Anthem Studies in Law Reform, 1)

$19.99 $90

The Democracy Amendments: Constitutional Reforms to Save the United States

$12.92 $24.21

Some legal experts believe a constitution's lifespan is under 20 years, making the US Constitution outdated

While the US Constitution has been in place for over 200 years, some legal experts argue that the lifespan of a constitution is much shorter. According to the University of Chicago Law School, the average lifespan of a constitution since 1789 is just 17 years. This estimate suggests that constitutions are inherently unstable and prone to change, which contradicts their basic function of providing guiding national principles, establishing rules, and limiting government power.

The short lifespan of constitutions can be attributed to various factors. One key factor is the inclusion of important design and process elements, which can extend the life of a constitution by decades. A successful constitution serves as a coordination device, creating a state of equilibrium where no party has an incentive to deviate. Self-enforcement is crucial because there is often no external guarantor to enforce the constitutional agreement independently.

However, hidden information at the time of drafting can also create pressures on the constitution later on. For example, a party to constitutional negotiation may misrepresent its intentions, leading to miscalculations of relative costs and benefits. If the disadvantaged party realizes the severity of the miscalculation, it may seek to renegotiate the deal or demand a better overall agreement.

Additionally, there are inherent challenges to maintaining a constitution over time. The University of Chicago Law School's analysis suggests that by the age of 50, only 19% of constitutions will still be in place. This means that the US Constitution, at over 200 years old, is an outlier in terms of longevity. While some may view this as a sign of its effectiveness, others may argue that it is outdated and in need of revision.

In recent years, there have been growing efforts to use Article V of the US Constitution, which outlines the process for amending the document, to hold a new constitutional convention. Advocates for a convention argue that it is necessary to address various issues, such as a balanced budget amendment. However, critics warn that invoking Article V would expose the entire Constitution to potential sweeping changes, putting fundamental aspects of American democracy at risk. The lack of safeguards and instructions for choosing delegates in Article V raises concerns about the potential impact on rights and freedoms.

There are no rules for an Article V convention, meaning delegates could be unaccountable and unelected

There have been growing efforts to use Article V of the US Constitution, which outlines the process to amend the document, to hold a new constitutional convention. This would involve two-thirds of state legislatures (34) petitioning Congress for a convention. However, there is a concern that there are no rules or guidelines for an Article V convention outlined in the Constitution. This lack of guidance could result in delegates being unaccountable and unelected, with no restrictions on the amendments they could propose.

The absence of rules for an Article V convention means there are no safeguards to restrain delegates or instructions for choosing them. As a result, any part of the Constitution could be up for debate, including fundamental aspects of democracy and cherished rights such as freedom of speech and the right to peaceful protest. This has raised fears that extremists could exploit the lack of rules to push for sweeping changes that could put the basics of American democracy at risk.

Wealthy special interests, including wealthy donors, corporations, and radical far-right actors, are among those pushing for an Article V convention. With no rules in place, there is a risk that these interests could reshape the Constitution for their own benefit. While some may argue that delegates would only propose slight alterations, there is no guarantee that this would be the case, and the potential for far-reaching changes is a significant concern.

The potential consequences of an Article V convention without rules are serious. Not only could it lead to unelected and unaccountable delegates, but it could also result in amendments that revoke cherished rights and freedoms. It is crucial to recognize that the lack of rules could have a significant impact on the democratic process and the protection of individual liberties. While some may advocate for a convention to address perceived issues with the current Constitution, the potential for unintended consequences and the exposure of the entire Constitution to potential changes are significant risks that cannot be overlooked.

The US Constitution is the oldest in use today, and some believe its flexibility negates the need for an Article V convention

There have been growing efforts to use Article V of the Constitution, which outlines the process for amending the document, to hold a new constitutional convention. Article V states that Congress must hold a constitutional convention if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) call for one. While some may advocate for a convention to address specific issues, there are no rules or safeguards in Article V to limit the convention to a single issue or to restrain delegates. As a result, an Article V convention could expose the Constitution to sweeping changes and put the basics of American democracy at risk.

Professor McCarty, for example, believes that the flexibility of the US Constitution negates the need for an Article V Convention. He attributes the longevity of the Constitution to its brevity and bare-bones nature, which make it adaptable to changing times. According to Professor McCarty, the need for formal amendments can be avoided through judicial review, which allows for the interpretation and application of the Constitution to evolve.

However, others argue that a constitutional convention is necessary for substantial reform. Sanford Levinson, a professor at the University of Texas Law School, has called for a "wholesale revision" of the Constitution. The lack of rules and safeguards in Article V has also raised concerns about the potential influence of special interests, wealthy donors, and corporations in shaping the Constitution for their benefit. Despite these differing views, it is clear that the US Constitution's resilience and adaptability have contributed to its longevity, and any amendments or revisions must be carefully considered to ensure the protection of democratic values and the rights of Americans.

Explore related products

Prison Religion: Faith-Based Reform and the Constitution

$37 $37

Making Modern Florida: How the Spirit of Reform Shaped a New State Constitution (Florida Government and Politics)

$19.4 $29.95

Political Thought of the American Revolution: A Reader: Vol. II: Revolutionary Constitution-Making and Social Reform

$19.99

Hit Refresh on the U.S. Constitution: A Revolutionary Roadmap for Fulfilling the Promise of Democracy

$9.99 $14.99

The People’s Constitution: 200 Years, 27 Amendments, and the Promise of a More Perfect Union

$18.4 $45

Democracy and Constitution Reform in Trinidad and Tobago

$9.99

Wealthy donors, corporations, and far-right actors are pushing for an Article V convention to reshape the Constitution for their benefit

There are growing efforts to use Article V of the US Constitution, which governs how to amend the document, to hold a new constitutional convention. Wealthy donors, corporations, and far-right actors are pushing for an Article V convention in states across the country to reshape the Constitution for their benefit. They are just a few states away from succeeding. Under Article V, Congress is required to hold a constitutional convention if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) call for one.

There are no rules or safeguards in Article V to restrain delegates or instructions for choosing them, which means the group of people rewriting the Constitution could be totally unelected and unaccountable. There is also nothing to limit the convention to a single issue, so delegates could write amendments that revoke any of our most cherished rights, such as our right to peaceful protest, freedom of speech, religion, or privacy. This would put the basics of our democracy at risk.

Additionally, there are no rules preventing corporations from pouring money into the convention to ensure their interests are served. An Article V Convention could lead to long and costly legal battles, uncertainty about how our democracy functions, and likely economic instability.

There are currently four major campaigns for an Article V Convention: the Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) campaign, the Convention of States (COS) campaign, the Wolf-PAC campaign, and the term limits campaign. Each has different goals, but together, they have convinced 28 states to call for a convention, just six states short of the number needed.

Extremists on both sides of the political spectrum are pushing for a constitutional convention, which could put basic democratic principles at risk

There are growing efforts to use Article V of the Constitution, which outlines the process to amend the document, to hold a new constitutional convention. Extremists on both sides of the political spectrum are pushing for a convention, which could put basic democratic principles at risk.

Article V states that Congress must hold a constitutional convention if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) call for one. This method of amending the Constitution has never been used before and has no rules or guidelines outlined in the Constitution. This means that the group of people rewriting the Constitution could be unelected and unaccountable, and there would be nothing to limit the convention to a single issue.

One campaign advocating for a convention is pushing for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, claiming to have gathered 28 state resolutions, just six short of the number needed for Congress to call an Article V convention. However, more than half of these resolutions are over 30 years old.

Wealthy donors, corporations, and radical far-right actors are also among those pushing for a convention, hoping to reshape the Constitution for their own benefit. While some may claim to care only about one issue, there would be nothing to stop delegates from proposing sweeping changes to any part of the Constitution, including our systems of checks and balances and our most cherished rights, such as freedom of speech and the right to peaceful protest.

Some constitutional scholars, such as Sanford Levinson, a professor at the University of Texas Law School, believe that a constitutional convention is the only hope for substantial reform and have called for a "wholesale revision" of the document. However, others argue that the current political climate is very different from 1787, and there is no figure like George Washington who can put country above politics and guide the process.

Frequently asked questions