Whitepine

Constitutional Convention

The power to reshape government doesn't belong only to Congress.

The Original Convention

The Constitutional Convention was the 1787 meeting in Philadelphia that replaced the Articles of Confederation with the U.S. Constitution. Delegates debated representation, executive power, slavery, and checks and balances. The final document was signed on September 17, 1787, then sent to the states for ratification.

We Can Do This Again

Article V of the Constitution permits two paths for proposing amendments:

  1. By Congress: Two-thirds of both the House and Senate propose an amendment (used for all 27 existing amendments)
  2. By Convention: Congress must call a convention if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) submit applications

No Article V convention has ever been held. The rules for organizing one are not specified in the Constitution, creating uncertainty about how it would function.

The Constitutional Convention of 1787

1787 – 1787

12 states participated

Participating States

To address the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and establish a stronger, more effective national government

Following years of dysfunction under the Articles of Confederation, delegates convened in Philadelphia ostensibly to revise the Articles but instead drafted an entirely new Constitution. The convention addressed fundamental questions about representation, executive power, slavery, and checks and balances. The resulting document created the framework for American government that endures today.

Outcome: Delegates produced the United States Constitution, establishing a federal system with separate legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The document was signed on September 17, 1787, and ratified by all thirteen states by 1790.

Timeline of Events

Loading timeline...

Note: The convention met in secret to allow open debate. Major compromises included the Great Compromise (bicameral legislature), the Three-Fifths Compromise on representation, and the creation of an Electoral College. Rhode Island did not send delegates but later ratified the Constitution.

Direct Election of U.S. Senators

1893 – 1913

27 states participated

Participating States

To make senators directly elected by the people rather than chosen by state legislatures

For decades, deadlocks, corruption, and perceived illegitimacy plagued the system of state legislatures choosing senators. Progressive reformers pushed for direct election, and many states began implementing advisory votes. As applications for an Article V convention mounted, Congress finally proposed the Seventeenth Amendment to preempt the convention and maintain control of the amendment process.

Outcome: Congress proposed the Seventeenth Amendment in 1912, which was ratified in 1913, establishing direct popular election of U.S. Senators. No Article V convention was called.

Timeline of Events

Loading timeline...

Note: Twenty-seven states filed Article V applications between 1893 and 1911. The threat of a convention was a key factor that moved Congress to act. By 1912, most states had already implemented some form of popular senatorial election, making the amendment nearly inevitable.

State Legislative Reapportionment Convention Movement

1963 – 1969

33 states participated

Participating States

After the Supreme Court's decision in Reynolds v. Sims (1964), which required state legislative districts to have equal populations, rural and conservative states sought a constitutional amendment to preserve geographic-based representation and limit federal judicial control over apportionment

After the Supreme Court ruled in Reynolds v. Sims (1964) that state legislative districts must have equal population, rural and conservative interests pushed for a convention to propose an amendment preserving geographic-based representation. Senator Everett Dirksen led the charge. The effort peaked at 33 states but stalled after Senator Dirksen's death, falling just one state short of triggering the first Article V convention.

Outcome: The campaign fell one state short of the 34 required to compel Congress to call a convention. Momentum collapsed after Senator Everett Dirksen's death in 1969, and several states later rescinded their applications. No convention was called.

Timeline of Events

Loading timeline...

Note: The movement was a direct backlash to Supreme Court reapportionment rulings in Baker v. Carr (1962) and Reynolds v. Sims (1964). It represented one of the closest approaches to an Article V convention in U.S. history prior to the 1970s balanced budget push. The proposal was often called the 'Dirksen Amendment.'

Balanced Budget Amendment Convention Drive

1975 – 1983

32 states participated

Participating States

Rising inflation and federal deficits in the 1970s led a coordinated campaign to require a balanced federal budget through a constitutional amendment

Rising federal deficits in the 1970s prompted fiscal conservatives to push for a constitutional balanced budget requirement. A coordinated campaign promoted by the National Taxpayers Union and other groups reached 32 state applications by 1983, just two short of the threshold. Congress responded with its own amendment proposal and later with statutory budget controls, reducing pressure for a convention.

Outcome: The drive peaked at 32 of the 34 required states. Congress responded: the Senate passed S.J.Res. 58 on August 4, 1982, but the House fell short of the two-thirds threshold on October 1, 1982. Momentum faded. In 1985 Congress enacted the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit control law. From 1988 through 2010, many states rescinded earlier applications. No convention was called.

Timeline of Events

Loading timeline...

Note: Contemporaneous White House materials list 31 states as of March 1982 and identify expected votes in Kentucky and Washington. Alaska added in 1982 and Missouri in 1983 marked the high water. Most applications in this period used similar language promoted by taxpayer groups.

Congressional Term Limits Movement

1995 – 2001

7 states participated

Participating States

Frustration with entrenched incumbents following U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton, which invalidated state-imposed congressional term limits

After the Supreme Court struck down state-imposed term limits in 1995, advocates tried a creative workaround: ballot initiatives requiring candidates to support a federal term limits amendment or face negative ballot labels. Seven states enacted such measures in 1996, but the Supreme Court struck them down in 2001. Only Colorado explicitly pursued an Article V convention application, and the convention route never gained momentum.

Outcome: Seven states enacted ballot-label initiatives or an Article V resolution in 1996. The Supreme Court struck down Missouri's 'scarlet letter' labels in Cook v. Gralike (2001), effectively ending such initiatives nationwide. No Article V convention was called. The direct convention route never approached the 34-state threshold.

Timeline of Events

Loading timeline...

Note: These 'scarlet letter' laws required ballot labels like 'DISREGARDED VOTERS' INSTRUCTION ON TERM LIMITS' for incumbents who failed to support a federal amendment and 'DECLINED TO PLEDGE TO SUPPORT TERM LIMITS' for non-incumbents who refused to pledge. Cook v. Gralike declared such labels unconstitutional additions to candidate qualifications.

Convention of States: Fiscal Restraints, Term Limits, Limits on Federal Power

2014 – 2025

19 states participated

Participating States

Perceived federal overreach, debt growth, and desire for structural reforms

The Convention of States Project, launched in 2013, advocates for a limited-scope Article V convention to propose amendments in three areas: fiscal restraints on the federal government, term limits for officials, and limits on federal power. Using model legislation and grassroots organizing, the movement has secured applications from 19 states, with active campaigns in additional states.

Outcome: Ongoing. Nineteen of the required 34 states have passed matching resolutions as of October 2025. Additional states have considered or passed resolutions in a single chamber.

Timeline of Events

Loading timeline...

Note: This is the most active and organized Article V convention effort in modern times. Critics worry about the scope of a convention, while supporters argue it's the only way to impose structural limits on federal power.

1 / 6

Why Convention Applications Matter

Even when convention attempts fall short, they demonstrate popular will and pressure Congress to act. The threat of a convention helped produce the Seventeenth Amendment for direct election of senators.

Power Without Precedent

An Article V convention would be only the second constitutional convention in American history. No one knows exactly how it would work:

These unanswered questions make some cautious about calling a convention, while others see this uncertainty as evidence that the convention power remains a viable check on federal overreach.

The Double-Edged Sword

Opponents worry about a "runaway convention" that might propose radical changes beyond its stated purpose. Supporters argue that any proposed amendments still require ratification by 38 states, providing ample safeguards.

Common Questions

Has a convention ever been close to happening?

Yes. The 1960s reapportionment effort reached 33 states, one short of the threshold. The 1980s balanced budget push reached 32 states. The current Convention of States effort has 19 states, more than halfway to 34.

What happens if 34 states apply?

Congress must call a convention. However, the Constitution provides no guidance on format, delegate selection, or rules. Legal scholars debate whether Congress has discretion over these details or whether states control the process.

Can states rescind their applications?

This is unsettled law. Many states have rescinded past applications, but no definitive legal ruling addresses whether rescissions are valid or how long applications remain active.

Would a convention propose just one amendment?

Unknown. Some argue that state applications can limit the convention's scope to specific topics. Others contend that once convened, a convention has plenary power to propose any amendments it chooses, subject to state ratification.

How would delegates be selected?

The Constitution is silent. Presumably each state would determine its own method, perhaps through legislative appointment, popular election, or gubernatorial selection. Equal state representation seems likely but isn't specified.

The Path Forward

The Article V convention remains the ultimate instrument of popular sovereignty—a way for states and citizens to propose constitutional changes when Congress won't act.

It's never been used. But the threat of using it has mattered. And if 15 more states join the Convention of States effort, we'll discover whether this 235-year-old constitutional provision still works.

Citations:

Constitutional Convention