The idea of a new Constitutional Convention is one that has periodically surfaced in American political discourse but has never come to fruition since the original convention in 1787. While the U.S. Constitution has proven remarkably durable, the modern era presents challenges that the Founding Fathers could not have foreseen: political polarization, technological advancements, global economic shifts, and debates over state sovereignty. With increasing dissatisfaction with federal governance and rising calls for reform from various political factions, the question arises: Is it time to consider a 21st-century Constitutional Convention?
This chapter explores the mechanisms by which such a convention could be called, the potential reforms that could emerge, and the risks and rewards of undertaking such an ambitious endeavor. While the notion of rewriting the foundational document of the republic is fraught with uncertainty, it remains a compelling topic as Americans grapple with the limitations of the current system and the need for structural adaptation in an evolving world.
The U.S. Constitution provides two methods for amending the document under Article V:
Congressional Proposal: Amendments can be proposed by a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the states (38 out of 50).
Convention of the States: If two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) call for a convention, Congress is required to convene it. Any amendments proposed by the convention would still require ratification by three-fourths of the states.
While the first method has led to 27 ratified amendments, the second method—a full Constitutional Convention—has never been utilized. The closest historical precedent was the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, which was originally intended to amend the Articles of Confederation but resulted in the complete drafting of a new Constitution.
Given contemporary dissatisfaction with government gridlock, several states have considered invoking Article V to call for a new convention. The challenge, however, is that such an effort is inherently unpredictable. Without clear guidelines on how a convention would be structured, some fear it could spiral into an unmanageable process that risks dismantling constitutional protections rather than strengthening them.
A 21st-century Constitutional Convention could potentially address a wide range of structural issues. Below are some of the most commonly discussed reforms:
One of the most contentious issues in modern governance is the electoral system. Proposals for reform include:
Abolishing the Electoral College: Critics argue that the Electoral College undermines the principle of “one person, one vote” by giving disproportionate power to smaller states.
Ranked-Choice Voting: A system that allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, ensuring broader representation and reducing political polarization.
Proportional Representation in Congress: Reforming the House of Representatives to allocate seats based on a proportional vote, rather than a winner-take-all system.
Senate Representation Adjustments: Addressing the issue of smaller states having equal representation to much larger states in the Senate, potentially by weighting votes based on population.
Many of the movements for autonomy and secession explored in earlier chapters stem from conflicts over the balance of power between the federal government and the states. A convention might propose:
Clarifying the 10th Amendment: Strengthening states’ rights in areas such as taxation, education, and healthcare.
Expanding Regional Compacts: Allowing states to form official interstate agreements that give them greater control over policies affecting their regions.
Decentralizing Federal Power: Shifting certain decision-making authorities to regional or state governments to reduce federal overreach.
Public trust in government institutions is at historic lows. To combat political entrenchment and corruption, some proposed reforms include:
Term Limits for Congress and Supreme Court Justices: Preventing lifetime career politicians and ensuring fresh perspectives in government.
Campaign Finance Reform: Reducing the influence of corporate money in elections through public financing of campaigns.
Balanced Budget Amendment: Requiring the federal government to maintain fiscal responsibility and limit deficit spending.
The current constitutional framework leaves U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia without full representation. A convention could address:
Statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico: Granting full voting rights to these populations.
New State Creation Mechanisms: Establishing a clearer pathway for territories or regions seeking statehood.
Revamping the Territorial Clause: Defining the rights and status of U.S. territories with greater clarity.
The evolution of American society has led to new discussions about civil liberties. A Constitutional Convention might examine:
Clarifying the Second Amendment: Defining gun rights and regulations in a modern context.
Privacy and Digital Rights: Establishing constitutional protections for personal data, online surveillance, and artificial intelligence governance.
Reproductive and Health Rights: Codifying protections for bodily autonomy and medical privacy.
A Constitutional Convention offers the opportunity to address longstanding issues in governance that the current amendment process struggles to tackle. Some benefits include:
Modernization of Governance: Bringing the Constitution into alignment with contemporary political, social, and technological realities.
Increased Civic Engagement: Encouraging public participation in the democratic process and fostering national debate on the future of governance.
Resolving Structural Gridlock: Providing a forum to address systemic inefficiencies in the federal government and judiciary.
While a new convention could lead to needed reforms, it also carries significant dangers:
A “Runaway Convention”: Without clear limitations, a convention could open the door to radical changes that destabilize foundational principles of governance.
Partisan Manipulation: Interest groups and political factions could hijack the process to push extreme agendas.
Loss of Established Rights: Some fear that opening the Constitution for revision could erode protections for civil rights and democratic institutions.
The idea of a 21st-century Constitutional Convention remains highly contentious. While the need for systemic reform is clear, the risks of a convention—particularly one without well-defined guardrails—make many cautious about undertaking such a process.
If the United States does move toward a convention, careful planning would be required to ensure that it strengthens rather than weakens democratic governance. Transparency, public engagement, and clear limitations on the scope of changes would be essential to prevent unintended consequences.
Ultimately, the question of a Constitutional Convention is not just about legal mechanisms—it is about whether the American people and their leaders are willing to confront the nation’s structural challenges head-on. As divisions continue to deepen, and as governance structures struggle to keep pace with change, the prospect of constitutional reform may become not just an option, but a necessity.