Malcolm Rivera
The United States Constitution is widely regarded as one of the most rigid and difficult constitutions to amend. The Constitution has only been amended 27 times since 1787, with the last successful amendment proposal gaining the necessary two-thirds support in both the House and Senate in 1978. The high level of partisan division in American politics is a critical source of the difficulty in amending the Constitution, as a successful amendment requires supermajority agreement across legislatures that are often dominated by a single political party. Proposed amendments often have a distinct partisan tinge, making it challenging to achieve the required supermajorities. The configuration of congressional power, legislative majorities, and the evolution of constitutional norms also play a role in the difficulty of amending the Constitution. While some argue that the Constitution is out of touch with contemporary America, others believe that recent efforts to amend it go too far and are an overreaction to dissatisfaction with the government.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Degree of political consensus | Low |
| Political partisanship | High |
| Difficulty of the amendment process | High |
| Age of the Constitution | Centuries-old |
| Number of amendments since drafting | 27 |
| Number of amendments since 1999 | 0 |
| Number of balanced-budget amendments proposed since 1999 | 134 |
| Number of amendments proposed in current Congress | 64 |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The US Constitution is ancient and impervious to amendments
The US Constitution is centuries-old and has been amended only 27 times since it was drafted in 1787. Amending the Constitution requires a degree of political consensus that is often in short supply. The last time a proposed amendment gained the necessary two-thirds support in both the House and Senate was in 1978.
The Constitution is designed to be difficult to amend. In a polarized society, it makes sense for constitutional change to be challenging, requiring support that is broadly distributed across the country. The higher the partisan division, the harder amendment will be, given that a successful amendment requires supermajority agreement in and among legislatures that are not ordinarily represented by a single political party.
The US Constitution has withstood all modern efforts to renovate its outdated architecture on elections, federalism, rights, and beyond. In the last half-century alone, democratic reformers have proposed thousands of amendments to make the Constitution more equal, more inclusive, and more just. However, each proposal has failed, with few ever making it beyond the point of initiation.
The current dynamics of American constitutional politics suggest no reason to expect anything different in the near to mid-term. The amendment process is very difficult and time-consuming, and the likelihood of amendment rises when political parties are willing to cooperate, with or without partisan divisions between them.
Opposition to the Constitution: Two Founding Fathers' Views
You may want to see also
Amendments require a degree of political consensus
Amending the US Constitution requires a high degree of political consensus, which is often lacking in today's polarised political climate. This consensus is necessary because any proposed amendment must gain a supermajority, or two-thirds support, in both the House and the Senate to pass. Only then can it be sent to the states for ratification.
The partisan nature of many proposed amendments makes achieving this consensus particularly challenging. For example, most balanced-budget proposals have been sponsored by Republicans, while proposals to authorise limits on campaign contributions and expenditures have primarily come from Democrats. This dynamic makes it difficult to secure the required supermajorities in both chambers of Congress, where support from both sides of the political aisle is needed.
The configuration of congressional power and the distribution of legislative majorities across states also play a role in the difficulty of amending the Constitution. The likelihood of a successful amendment increases when political parties are willing to cooperate, even if partisan divisions exist. Conversely, a high concentration of legislative power within a single party can make the process easier, assuming the dominant party is open to pushing through changes.
The United States Constitution has a reputation for being one of the most rigid and difficult to amend in the world. In the last 50 years, democratic reformers have proposed thousands of amendments to make the Constitution more equal, inclusive, and just, but none have succeeded. The current dynamics of American constitutional politics suggest that this trend is likely to continue in the near to medium term.
Despite the challenges, some observers argue that the amendment process should begin with the states rather than at the federal level. This approach could make it easier to generate good ideas, address their problems, and gauge their level of support. However, retaining the stringent voting rules outlined in Article V would still prevent bad ideas from gaining traction.
The Constitution of 1845: Emphasizing the Power of the People
You may want to see also
Amendments need supermajority agreement in legislatures
Amending the US Constitution requires a degree of political consensus, which is often in short supply. This is due to the supermajority agreement in legislatures that is needed for an amendment to pass. In other words, a proposed amendment must be passed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate), and then ratified by three-fourths of the states.
This process is intentionally difficult and time-consuming. In a polarised society, it makes sense for constitutional change to be challenging, requiring support that is broadly distributed across the country. Americans are often divided on fundamental questions, so it is essential that a local majority cannot unilaterally rewrite the structure of the government or impose new constraints.
The high bar for amendments has resulted in very few successful changes to the Constitution. Since it was drafted in 1787, there have only been 27 amendments, with the last successful amendment gaining the necessary two-thirds support in both the House and Senate in 1978.
The difficulty of amending the Constitution has led to concerns about its rigidity and outdated nature. In the last 50 years, democratic reformers have proposed thousands of amendments to make the Constitution more equal, inclusive, and just, but none have succeeded.
The likelihood of an amendment passing increases when political parties are willing to cooperate, even if there are partisan divisions between them. However, when there is a high concentration of legislative power within a single party, achieving the necessary supermajority agreement becomes more feasible, assuming the dominant party is open to making changes.
Founders Who Shaped the Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Most amendment proposals are dead on arrival
The United States Constitution is considered one of the world's most difficult constitutions to amend. The last time a proposed amendment gained the necessary two-thirds support in both the House and Senate was in 1978, and since 1999, only 20 proposed amendments have been voted on by the full House or Senate. The high level of partisan division in American politics is a critical source of this amendment difficulty, as most amendment proposals have a distinct partisan tinge, making it challenging to achieve the required supermajorities in both chambers of Congress.
The configuration of congressional power, the evolution of constitutional norms, and the concentration of legislative power within a single party also play a role in the difficulty of amending the Constitution. Furthermore, the Constitution is centuries-old and, to many, out of touch with contemporary America.
Amendments are often proposed to overturn or get around controversial court decisions or to address issues related to campaign finance, balanced budgets, and term limits. However, the amendment process is time-consuming and challenging, requiring a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states. This polarized political landscape means that most amendment proposals are dead on arrival, with anything favoured by one set of national politicians likely to be opposed by another.
The high bar for amending the Constitution is intentional, ensuring that any changes have broad support across the country. However, it also means that the United States Constitution has withstood all modern efforts to update it, with thousands of proposed amendments failing to gain traction.
Understanding Normal Wear and Tear in NYC Apartments
You may want to see also
The Constitution is out of touch with contemporary America
The United States Constitution, drafted in 1787, is one of the world's most difficult constitutions to amend. In the last 50 years, thousands of amendments have been proposed by democratic reformers to make the Constitution more equal, inclusive, and just. However, the Constitution has only been amended 27 times, with the last successful amendment proposal gaining the necessary two-thirds support in both the House and Senate in 1978.
The Constitution's rigidity is cause for concern, as it is centuries-old and, to many, out of touch with contemporary America. The high level of partisan division in the United States is a critical source of amendment difficulty. Given that a successful amendment requires supermajority agreement across legislatures, the higher the partisan division, the harder it is to achieve the necessary consensus.
The distinct partisan tinge of most proposed amendments makes it challenging to secure supermajorities in both chambers of Congress. For instance, the majority of balanced-budget proposals have been sponsored by Republicans, while proposals to authorize limits on campaign contributions and expenditures have primarily come from Democrats.
Additionally, the configuration of congressional power, the evolution of constitutional norms, and the consolidation or disintegration of legislative majorities within and across states can influence the ease or difficulty of amending the Constitution.
Despite the challenges, some scholars argue for flipping the amendment process by allowing state legislatures to propose amendments while retaining Article V's tough voting rules. This approach could facilitate the consideration of a broader range of ideas while maintaining the necessary checks to prevent the passage of detrimental amendments.
Freedom of Movement: A Constitutional Right
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The United States Constitution is centuries-old and is seen by many as out of touch with contemporary America. It is virtually impossible to amend, requiring a degree of political consensus that is rarely achieved. Amendments need supermajority agreement in legislatures, which is difficult when there is a high degree of partisan division.
Partisan division makes constitutional amendments harder to achieve, as they require supermajority agreement across legislatures. When there is a high concentration of legislative power within a single party, amendments are more likely to pass if the dominant party is open to pushing them through. However, the opposite is also true, where anything favoured by one set of politicians is often opposed by another, resulting in most amendment proposals being dead on arrival.
There have been various constitutional amendment proposals over the years, covering a range of topics. Some examples include proposals to limit congressional terms, authorise limits on campaign contributions, and require representatives to be apportioned based on states' citizen populations. Other proposals have sought to outlaw flag burning, allow voluntary school prayer, make English the official language, and abolish the Electoral College.
