The drive for a new Constitutional Convention
Wanted: statesmanlike figure bearing close resemblance to James Madison (or someone who at least has read him) to direct possible second Constitutional Convention devoted to balancing budget and perhaps other matters. No Keynesians need apply. Address: Box 1787, c/o U.S. Congress.
The ad has not yet been placed, and the convention has not yet been called, but much of official Washington is beginning to be afraid that it might be. Since the one and only Constitutional Convention of 1787, there has rarely been such a determined effort to convene another. Altogether 27 state legislatures have voted to call a convention to approve an amendment requiring a balanced federal budget. The National Taxpayers Union,* which is leading the drive, estimates that the necessary 34 states will be reached by summer.
The issue has already been injected into 1980 presidential politics. Staking out political ground to the right of Jimmy Carter, California Governor Jerry Brown has supported the movement for a convention. Over the indignant opposition of many fellow Democrats in his state, he has arranged for speaking engagements around the country to promote the convention.
The prospect of a Constitutional Convention is unnerving for most members of Congress. They fear they will be moving into a constitutional no man's land uncharted by the founding fathers. Article V of the Constitution simply provides that a convention will be called when two-thirds of the state legislatures petition Congress for one. Any amendments adopted by the convention must be ratified by three-quarters of the states before taking effect. There is no evading the clarity of the text. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper No. 85, "The words of the article are peremptory. Congress shall call a convention. Nothing in this particular is left to the discretion of that body."
Congress, however, must attend to all the not-so-trivial details of such a convention. How will the delegates be chosen? Will the states have equal representation, as in the U.S. Senate, or will their votes be weighted according to population? How long can the convention go on? Above all, must it stick to the issue for which it was called, or is it free to consider other matters as well? The convention can certainly be restricted, declares U.S. Attorney General Griffin Bell. "Limits can be set," he says. "Congress has a duty to do so." Paul Freund of the Harvard Law School agrees: "Since the Constitution is silent on details, the details become a political question. Since Congress issues the call, it can define the jurisdiction of the convention."