Second Constitutional Convention of the United States

[1][2] Since the initial 1787–88 debate over ratification of the Constitution, there have been sporadic calls for the convening of a second convention to modify and correct perceived shortcomings in the Federal system it established.

[4] In the late 1960s, Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen called for a constitutional convention by appealing to state legislatures to summon one.

[5] Three times in the 20th century, concerted efforts were undertaken by proponents of particular issues to secure the number of applications necessary to summon an Article V Convention.

[11] In January 1975, Congressman Jerry Pettis, a Republican from California, introduced a concurrent resolution (94th H.Con.Res.28[12]) calling a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution.

A report in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2011 described the movement for a convention as gaining "traction" in public debate,[2] and wrote that "concern over a seemingly dysfunctional climate in Washington and issues ranging from the national debt to the overwhelming influence of money in politics have spawned calls for fundamental change in the document that guides the nation's government.

"[14] Scholars such as Richard Labunski, Sanford Levinson, Lawrence Lessig, Glenn Reynolds,[2] Larry Sabato,[15] and newspaper columnist William Safire[16] have called for constitutional changes that would curb the dominant role of money in politics.

[2] Scholar Stein Ringen in his book Nation of Devils suggested that only a "total overhaul" of the constitution could fix the "years of accumulated damage and dysfunction," according to a report in the Economist in 2013.

[17] French journalist Jean-Philippe Immarigeon suggested in Harper's Magazine that the "nearly 230-year-old constitution stretched past the limits of its usefulness".

[18] A 2011 report in USA Today suggested that 17 of the required 34 states had petitioned Congress by then for a convention to deal with the issue of a balanced budget amendment.

"[24] But Congress has been reluctant to "impose limitations on its spending and borrowing and taxing powers", according to anti-tax activist David Biddulph.

"[24] According to a New York Times report, different groups would be nervous that a convention summoned to address only one issue might propose a wholesale revision of the entire Constitution, possibly limiting "provisions they hold dear.

"[25] Such groups include the American Civil Liberties Union, the John Birch Society, the National Organization for Women, the Gun Owners Clubs of America and conservative advocate Phyllis Schlafly.

One is inside, one is outside.Lessig argued that the ordinary means of politics were not feasible to solve the problem affecting the United States government because the incentives corrupting politicians are so powerful.

[28] Lessig believes a convention is needed in view of Supreme Court decisions to eliminate most limits on campaign contributions.

[15] Sabato argued that America needs a "grand meeting of clever and high-minded people to draw up a new, improved constitution better suited to the 21st century.