Eli5: Why hasn’t the U.S constitution been amended since 1992?
In: 8
Amending the constitution is (intentionally) very difficult. Because the US is functionally a two-party system and no party ever gets a 2/3 majority at the federal level now, there needs to be (partial) bipartisan support for any amendment. There hasn’t been any subject that has passed that threshold since 1992.
The more partisan the US becomes, the harder it becomes to amend the constitution because the parties are less and less likely to work together on anything.
There is an alternate mechanism to amendment, called a “constitutional convention” called by 2/3 of the states. A constitutional convention amendment has never been done though, and it doesn’t look likely that 2/3 of the states would agree on anything either right now.
Amending the constitution is (intentionally) very difficult. Because the US is functionally a two-party system and no party ever gets a 2/3 majority at the federal level now, there needs to be (partial) bipartisan support for any amendment. There hasn’t been any subject that has passed that threshold since 1992.
The more partisan the US becomes, the harder it becomes to amend the constitution because the parties are less and less likely to work together on anything.
There is an alternate mechanism to amendment, called a “constitutional convention” called by 2/3 of the states. A constitutional convention amendment has never been done though, and it doesn’t look likely that 2/3 of the states would agree on anything either right now.
Amending the constitution is (intentionally) very difficult. Because the US is functionally a two-party system and no party ever gets a 2/3 majority at the federal level now, there needs to be (partial) bipartisan support for any amendment. There hasn’t been any subject that has passed that threshold since 1992.
The more partisan the US becomes, the harder it becomes to amend the constitution because the parties are less and less likely to work together on anything.
There is an alternate mechanism to amendment, called a “constitutional convention” called by 2/3 of the states. A constitutional convention amendment has never been done though, and it doesn’t look likely that 2/3 of the states would agree on anything either right now.
Two big reasons:
1) compared to most countries and most state constitutions, the US federal constitution is very basic. It lines out the rough structure of the federal government, it’s rights andnrelarionahop with states, some specific things the government can’t interfere with and that’s….about it. Rough structure and protections. The relative simplicity and reliance on legislation and the states to create the vast bulk of law means that most things simply aren’t a constitutional issue that requires an amendment to resolve.
2) It is really, REALLY difficult to do, to the point that it is effectively impossible in a partisan environment. If you look at the trajectory of politics over the last 30-odd years and just how partisan and contentious the issues which would require an amendment to change or clarify are it’s not exactly surprising.
Two big reasons:
1) compared to most countries and most state constitutions, the US federal constitution is very basic. It lines out the rough structure of the federal government, it’s rights andnrelarionahop with states, some specific things the government can’t interfere with and that’s….about it. Rough structure and protections. The relative simplicity and reliance on legislation and the states to create the vast bulk of law means that most things simply aren’t a constitutional issue that requires an amendment to resolve.
2) It is really, REALLY difficult to do, to the point that it is effectively impossible in a partisan environment. If you look at the trajectory of politics over the last 30-odd years and just how partisan and contentious the issues which would require an amendment to change or clarify are it’s not exactly surprising.
Two big reasons:
1) compared to most countries and most state constitutions, the US federal constitution is very basic. It lines out the rough structure of the federal government, it’s rights andnrelarionahop with states, some specific things the government can’t interfere with and that’s….about it. Rough structure and protections. The relative simplicity and reliance on legislation and the states to create the vast bulk of law means that most things simply aren’t a constitutional issue that requires an amendment to resolve.
2) It is really, REALLY difficult to do, to the point that it is effectively impossible in a partisan environment. If you look at the trajectory of politics over the last 30-odd years and just how partisan and contentious the issues which would require an amendment to change or clarify are it’s not exactly surprising.
The 1992 amendment passed because it was already in the works since 1792.
To get a new amendment started, one needs 67 Senators and 292 Representatives to agree on one. That is about as hard as herding cats.
Then majorities are needed in 38 state legislatures. That is as hard as teaching a herd of cats to do the latest TikTok dance craze.
Or to put it another way, unless both the Democratic and Republican parties agree on an issue at the national and the state level, no amendment will pass.
The 1992 amendment passed because it was already in the works since 1792.
To get a new amendment started, one needs 67 Senators and 292 Representatives to agree on one. That is about as hard as herding cats.
Then majorities are needed in 38 state legislatures. That is as hard as teaching a herd of cats to do the latest TikTok dance craze.
Or to put it another way, unless both the Democratic and Republican parties agree on an issue at the national and the state level, no amendment will pass.
The 1992 amendment passed because it was already in the works since 1792.
To get a new amendment started, one needs 67 Senators and 292 Representatives to agree on one. That is about as hard as herding cats.
Then majorities are needed in 38 state legislatures. That is as hard as teaching a herd of cats to do the latest TikTok dance craze.
Or to put it another way, unless both the Democratic and Republican parties agree on an issue at the national and the state level, no amendment will pass.
It’s extremely difficult to amend. Too difficult according to this Supreme Court Justice:
> fewer than 2 percent of the population could prevent enactment of a constitutional amendment. “It ought to be hard, but not that hard,”
Who said that? Some ultra liberal? Nope.
None other than the modern conservative godfather of the US Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia:
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/how_scalia_and_ginsburg_would_amend_the_constitution
Latest Answers