Amending the Constitution May Not Be the Answer

There has been a lot of talk about the need for any number of constitutional amendments once Democrats take back control of the federal government. Although I would like to see many changes in our federal government, I think people will be disappointed if they expect a flurry of constitutional amendments to occur, not because the Democratic Party wouldn’t like it to happen, but because the numbers just are not there and may never be there to do so.

Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two ways to propose amendments and two ways to ratify them.  To propose an amendment, one option is with a two-thirds vote of Congress (both House and Senate).  All current 27 amendments were proposed in this manner.  The second way is a Constitutional Convention called by Congress if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 of 50 states) request one.  Currently, 28 state legislatures are controlled by Republicans, 18 by Democrats and 4 have split legislatures. 

Article V also allows for two ways to ratify an amendment.  The first is for three-fourths of the state legislatures (38 of 50) or more to approve it.  The other option for ratification is for three-fourths of the states (38 of 50) to approve it through special conventions.

Obviously based on those numbers, Democrats won’t be able to amend the Constitution at this time or the in foreseeable future without Republican help.  That will require compromise. And that’s exactly what the founders had in mind when they created that document. They understood that, unless you bring the great majority of states along with you, changing the foundational framework of this nation would destroy the country.

I know we all want to amend the Constitution codifying abortion rights. Many want to put term limits on the Supreme Court and ban gerrymandering. And everyone wants to put restrictions on the role of the president so that another president like Donald Trump can never happen again. Those will have to wait until Democrats take back multiple state houses and have a supermajority in Congress. But don’t despair.  There are more ways to skin that cat. Congress can pass legislation for all of those issues. That can be done through the process of reconciliation which, in the Senate, only require a simple majority because they don’t involve spending.

When the Constitution was written, the authors knew that they couldn’t think of everything the future would bring. So, they included a method of altering the Constitution to deal with changing times. At the same time, they felt they had created something new and special. They knew that not every state would agree but they also knew that most of the states needed to agree to a change or it would create a nation that was continually at odds with itself. So, they made the Constitution amendable. But they also knew that making it too easy to change, would create a volatile nation that hung on the political winds of the moment.  So rightfully, they made it very difficult to change. That’s why there have only been 27 amendments to the Constitution in 250 years, and ten of those were virtually a part of the original document. Of the remaining 17 amendments two of those involved prohibition, one instituting it and the other repealing it.

Think of the Constitution as a contract between states that binds them together as a nation. That was the “original intent” of the founders.

Amendments to the Constitution were meant to right the wrongs of our country that the founders left out of the Constitution either because they were morally wrong or because it was something that they couldn’t imagine at the time, not to settle a difference of opinion between states or groups of people. That’s what legislation is for. And it’s not the fault of the Constitution if the people are too ignorant of the issues to understand that legislation will change based on who they vote for.

To fix our problems, for the most part, we need to do a few things. First, a Constitutional amendment to help us avoid another imperial presidency is wholly appropriate. Another amendment ending gerrymandering would also be important. Gerrymandering creates a government that allows politicians to avoid the will of the people. And we need to pass an amendment to remove dark money from elections and the ability of the wealthy to buy an election.

We need to spend a lot more time, energy and capital convincing all Americans of the rightness of our positions. We need to find ways for the two sides to come together in some form of consensus. The idea of one side imposing their will on the other is not viable for a democratic nation.

And finally, and most importantly, we need to educate our population on government and the importance of an informed vote. Democracy requires a populous that is educated and thoroughly involved in their government. That is the greatest safeguard of democracy we have.

🇺🇸

There are still 3 million Epstein files records that have not released and what has been released has been redacted to protect the guilty.  And more BS excuses why they can’t release the remainder, cynically claiming they were protecting the victims.

White House and Todd Blanche in violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act:  Day 212