The U.S. Constitution has 27 amendments; each was proposed by Congress and ratified by the states.
However, the Constitution sets forth another procedure, never before used, for amending the Constitution. At the request of two thirds of the states, a constitutional convention would be held, at which amendments could be proposed. Any proposals would become part of the Constitution if three fourths of the states ratified them, either at state conventions or in the state legislatures.
Currently, 27 of the needed 34 states have petitioned Congress for a constitutional convention, for the ostensible purpose of writing a balanced-budget amendment (BBA). However, the convention might propose other changes in addition or instead of a BBA—even a total rewrite of the Constitution—if 38 states agreed, the changes would become law.
In November, legislators from 30 states met in Salt Lake City to discuss the matter.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday December 11 2015, @07:25PM
Government, by its very nature, is an invention of humans, run by humans, staffed by humans.
Its not going to be perfect. The Constitution isn't perfect. The people who wrote it weren't perfect. There is no reason to expect a Constitutional convention would be perfect.
We have no chance of achieving perfect. So I wonder why you bring it up? Isn't it just another form of, "We shouldn't waste money going to space until we solve every social problem on earth"?
The Perfect is the enemy of the Good.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 11 2015, @07:58PM
We have no chance of achieving perfect. So I wonder why you bring it up? Isn't it just another form of, "We shouldn't waste money going to space until we solve every social problem on earth"?
Because you brought the matter up ("You ask for a real fail-safe, in a discussion about government?"). This isn't a "back at you" thing. Human involvement is not magic. You can plan for problems with a constitutional convention just as you can any other thing made by humans. I didn't mention the fail-safe because I thought it would act perfectly, but because it raises the threshold for screwing up by a significant amount of effort. Instead of just coopting a sufficiently large majority of delegates to a convention, you also have to suborn a supermajority of state legislatures. I think this threshold has been sufficient to prevent its misuse several times in history (such as during the Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR administrations).
Also, if you can suborn a supermajority of state legislatures, you probably can ignore the constitution already with the resulting convention being a rubber stamp on an already done deal.