Simone Lawson
Calls for a new constitutional convention in the United States have been made by academics and activists from across the political spectrum. The aim is to make substantive reforms to the federal government by rewriting the U.S. Constitution. However, the idea of a new constitutional convention is scary to many because of the risks associated with it. There are concerns that the convention could be runaway, with delegates being unaccountable and unelected, and that it could lead to a wholesale rewriting of the fundamental law of the land. Some worry that it could result in long and costly legal battles, uncertainty about how democracy functions, and economic instability.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Lack of clarity on rules and procedures | There is a lack of clarity on how a convention's rules and procedures will be set, which could lead to a “runaway convention". |
| Lack of representation | The delegates to a convention may not represent the interests of the people and could be totally unelected and unaccountable. |
| Potential for a single issue to be revoked | There is no guarantee that a convention will focus on a single issue, and it could propose a wholesale revision of the entire Constitution, revoking cherished rights such as the right to peaceful protest, freedom of religion, and privacy. |
| Influence of special interest groups and corporations | Wealthy special interest groups and corporations could influence the process and write their agenda into the Constitution, leading to long and costly legal battles and economic instability. |
| Risk of economic harm | A convention could propose amendments that require a balanced budget, threatening significant economic harm and causing job losses. |
| Difficulty in controlling the convention | States and other institutions may not be able to control the convention or limit its proposals, and it could set its agenda and bypass Congress. |
| Opposition from powerful groups | There is opposition to convening a convention from legislatures, large corporations, and labor unions, which makes the process more difficult. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Lack of clarity on how a convention's rules and procedures are set
There is a lack of clarity on how a convention's rules and procedures are set, which is a cause for concern. Article V of the Constitution, which provides two methods for amending the nation's frame of government, offers no guidance on how a convention should be run. This means that there is a risk of a "'runaway convention'", where delegates could propose a wholesale rewriting of the fundamental law.
The rules and procedures of a convention should be set by Congress well before it is assembled to prevent this. However, there is no guarantee that this will happen, and even if it does, there is no clear authority above a constitutional convention that could intervene if the convention does not follow these rules. This lack of clarity opens the door for powerful, well-funded interest groups to influence the process and press for changes beyond those initially envisioned.
For example, there are no rules preventing corporations from pouring money into the convention to ensure their interests are represented. As a result, a convention could become a platform for extremist groups and the ultra-wealthy to write their far-right agenda into the Constitution, threatening cherished civil rights such as freedom of speech, privacy, and freedom of religion.
Furthermore, it is unclear how votes will be allocated among delegates, and whether it will be one person one vote, one vote per state, or something else. This ambiguity adds to the uncertainty about how a convention's rules and procedures will be set and increases the risk of a "runaway convention".
To address these concerns, it is crucial to have clarity and transparency on how a convention's rules and procedures will be established and enforced. This includes determining the voting process, the role of delegates, and the scope of the convention's authority. Without these safeguards in place, a new constitutional convention could indeed be a scary prospect.
Foundational Principles of the Constitution in Article 3
You may want to see also
Potential for a runaway convention that rewrites the constitution
The potential for a "runaway convention" is one of the most significant concerns regarding a new constitutional convention. This term refers to the possibility that the convention could deviate from its intended purpose and instead rewrite large portions of the constitution, leading to significant political and social upheaval.
Article V of the Constitution, which outlines the process for amending the nation's frame of government, has been criticised for providing little guidance on how a convention should be conducted. There are no rules in place to prevent a convention from becoming a runaway convention, and once convened, it would be challenging to control or limit its scope. This lack of guardrails has led to fears that a convention could be co-opted by special interests or extremist groups, who could use it as a vehicle to push through their agenda.
The delegates to a convention are another concern. There is no guarantee that they would represent the interests of the people, and they could be influenced by powerful, well-funded interest groups or lobbyists. The absence of spending limits for influencing delegates further exacerbates this issue. Additionally, there are no mechanisms to ensure that delegates are accountable to the people, raising the possibility of unelected individuals making significant changes to the constitution.
The potential for a runaway convention is not merely hypothetical. Historically, conventions have deviated from their intended purpose and proposed sweeping changes. For example, the 1787 convention, which was initially convened to amend the Articles of Confederation, resulted in the creation of an entirely new governing document—the United States Constitution. This precedent underscores the risk that a modern-day convention could similarly veer off course and lead to unintended consequences.
To mitigate the risk of a runaway convention, some have suggested that Congress should enact a comprehensive set of procedures and rules to govern the convention before it is assembled. This could include clarity on how votes will be allocated among delegates, ensuring that they represent the interests of the people, and establishing safeguards to prevent special interests from exerting undue influence. However, the effectiveness of such measures depends on the willingness of Congress to implement them and the ability to foresee and address all potential challenges.
The US Constitution: A Concise Document of Pages
You may want to see also
Uncertainty about how democracy functions
A new constitutional convention could result in uncertainty about how democracy functions. This is because there is no clarity on how a convention's rules and procedures would be set. Article V, which provides two methods for amending the nation's frame of government, does not offer any guidance on how a convention should be run. This lack of structure could lead to a “runaway convention”, where delegates propose a wholesale revision of the entire Constitution, going beyond the initial scope of the convention.
The absence of established rules and procedures for a constitutional convention raises concerns about the potential for abuse of power. Without clear limitations, delegates could propose amendments that revoke cherished civil rights and freedoms, such as the right to peaceful protest, freedom of religion, and privacy, and free speech. Powerful, well-funded interest groups, corporations, and wealthy individuals could exert significant influence on the process, pursuing their own agendas and ensuring their interests are served. This could further contribute to uncertainty about the functioning of democracy, as the will of the people may be overshadowed by the influence of special interests.
Additionally, there is ambiguity regarding the allocation of votes among delegates. It is unclear whether it would be a "one person, one vote" system or if each state would have a single vote. This uncertainty could lead to disputes and further complicate the decision-making process.
The potential for a constitutional convention to propose a wide range of amendments, coupled with the lack of established procedures, raises concerns about the direction in which the country could be steered. Without a clear framework, there is a risk of significant economic, social, and political instability. For example, amendments requiring a balanced budget could have detrimental economic consequences, threatening key federal functions and potentially causing job losses.
Furthermore, the convention's proposals would still need to be ratified, and there is uncertainty regarding this process as well. While the Constitution specifies that 38 states must ratify an amendment, a convention might propose alternative ratification procedures, such as a national referendum or lowering the required fraction of states' approval. This adds another layer of uncertainty to the already ambiguous process, making it challenging to predict the ultimate impact on democracy.
Amendments: Revising the Constitution for a Modern Era
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Potential for economic instability
A new constitutional convention could lead to economic instability. The convention could propose a balanced budget amendment (BBA) requiring the federal government to balance its budget every year. This would threaten significant economic harm and cause problems for key federal functions such as Social Security. By mandating a balanced budget regardless of economic conditions, the amendment could push weak economies into recession and prolong and deepen recessions, resulting in substantial job losses. It would also limit the ability of policymakers to implement countercyclical fiscal policies, such as lowering taxes and increasing spending during economic downturns, which go against sound economic advice.
Additionally, a constitutional convention could be influenced by powerful, well-funded interest groups, such as Wall Street and energy companies, which could further exacerbate economic instability. With no federal or state limits on spending to influence delegates, these groups could press for changes that benefit their interests at the expense of economic stability. For example, Wall Street could seek to ban the taxation of capital income or prevent market regulations designed to avoid financial crises, while energy companies might lobby against a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system.
Furthermore, a convention could remove the states from the amendment ratification process and propose a national referendum instead. This would make it easier to enact amendments by lowering the required fraction of states' approval, as the 1787 convention did when it reduced the necessary fraction from three-quarters to two-thirds. With a lower threshold, amendments detrimental to economic stability could be passed more easily, bypassing the checks and balances provided by the states.
While some argue that a convention is necessary to curb the role of money in politics, the potential for influence by wealthy special interests and corporations could lead to economic policies that favour the wealthy and exacerbate inequality, further contributing to economic instability.
The Constitution's Daily Relevance: Your Rights and Freedoms
You may want to see also
Potential for powerful, well-funded interest groups to influence the process
The potential for powerful, well-funded interest groups to influence the process of a new constitutional convention is a significant concern. This is due to the absence of federal or state restrictions on spending to sway delegates. As a result, corporations and special interest groups could exploit this opportunity to exert their influence and secure favourable outcomes.
For instance, there is a risk that Wall Street interests might push for the elimination of taxation on capital income or the prevention of market regulations designed to avoid financial crises. Similarly, energy companies could advocate for the prohibition of a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system. These potential amendments could have far-reaching consequences for the economy and the environment.
Additionally, conservative advocacy organisations, such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), have been actively campaigning for a constitutional convention to advance their far-right agenda. They have provided state legislators with model legislation and developed strategies to meet the required number of states calling for a convention. This coordinated effort demonstrates the ability of well-funded interest groups to shape the process and pursue their desired outcomes.
Furthermore, a convention could propose a wholesale revision of the Constitution, going beyond the initial scope. This could include altering fundamental rights and freedoms, such as the right to free speech, privacy, and freedom of religion. The lack of limitations on a convention's power and the uncertainty of how it would operate contribute to the concern that powerful interest groups could significantly influence the process and secure amendments that serve their interests.
To address these concerns, it is crucial to establish comprehensive procedures and safeguards before convening a constitutional convention. Ensuring that delegates represent the interests of the people and preventing special interest groups from exerting undue influence are essential steps to mitigate the potential dominance of powerful, well-funded interests.
The Virginia Plan: Framing the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
A new constitutional convention is scary because it could lead to a "runaway convention" where a group of unelected and unaccountable people rewrites the constitution to revoke citizens' rights and civil liberties.
The right to peaceful protest could be revoked.
Freedom of religion could be revoked.
Powerful, well-funded interest groups such as corporations and ultra-wealthy individuals would be part of this convention.
The presence of these interest groups could lead to long and costly legal battles, uncertainty about how democracy functions, and potential economic instability.
