Constitutional Conventions and the Unconstitutional Path

Understanding the Constitutional Convention

The idea of a constitutional convention is often brought up in discussions about the future of the United States. However, the concept can be fraught with complex legal, political, and practical implications. To explore what might happen if the states were to call for a constitutional convention, we need to understand the history and the mechanics of how the US Constitution operates. In this article, we delve into what could happen, the challenges involved, and the reality of how such a convention might be used or ignored.

A Brief History of the US Constitution

Before the current US Constitution was ratified in 1787, the country operated under the Articles of Confederation. These Articles, while initially provisional, granted limited powers to a national government and did not provide strong enforcement mechanisms. As a result, states had significant autonomy and could effectively opt out of the Union if they saw fit. This arrangement was fraught with problems, leading to the creation of the Constitution.

The Call for a Constitutional Convention

In modern times, a call for a constitutional convention would likely invoke widespread debate, as it did during the formation of the Articles of Confederation. However, unlike the 1787 convention, which resulted in a new constitution, a convention called today would have to adhere to specific rules and constraints.

Unconstitutional as of Now

It is important to note that calling for a constitutional convention would itself be unconstitutional. The Article V of the Constitution explicitly lays out the process for amending the document, and no constitutional convention can be called under current legal frameworks.

The Modern Process for Constitutional Amendments

As of now, the only way to amend the US Constitution is through Congress. Specifically, two-thirds of both the House and the Senate must approve a proposed amendment, which then needs to be ratified by three-fourths of the states. This high threshold makes the amendment process deliberate and challenging, reflecting the intent of the Founding Fathers to ensure that significant changes were not made without broad agreement.

Potential Scenarios of a Constitutional Convention

While a constitutional convention as such is not possible, the idea of a "convention of states" to propose amendments remains a topic of discussion. Such a convention would involve the states setting the terms for proposed amendments. The outcome of these discussions could be one or more amendments, but these would still need to go through the ratification process.

Popular Proposals for Constitutional Amendments

Several popular proposals have emerged for what a convention of states might pass. Term limits on Congress and the Supreme Court are among the most discussed. However, these ideas face significant political opposition, given the entrenched interests in Congress and the courts.

A Balanced Budget Amendment

Another common proposal is a balanced budget amendment, which would require the federal government to balance its budget each year. This idea has also faced hurdles, as it would necessitate drastic changes in federal spending and revenue collection. The likelihood of a convention proposing and approving such an amendment remains uncertain.

Conclusion

The idea of a constitutional convention, whether for the purpose of proposing or amending the Constitution, is a complex and often contentious issue. While the notion of a constitutional convention is compelling in theory, the practical and legal hurdles make such a development unlikely. The current amendment process ensures that any changes to the Constitution are deliberated and ratified with the approval of a significant number of states, reflecting a cautious approach to constitutional change.