National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Resolu- tion No. 5, adopted at the Boston Convention, July 24, 1979 New York County Lawyers' Association, Report on the Proposed Con- stitutional Convention Procedures Act.. Political Implications of a National Constitutional Convention, by Kenneth The Alabama Lawyer-A Study in the Invalidity of Memorialization The Role of the States in Proposing Constitutional Amendments, by Fred P. Graham, former chief counsel of the Senate Subcommittee Can Public Officials be Delegates to the Constitutional Convention?, Chicago-Kent Law Review-Notes and Comments, Rescinding Memoriali- Emory University Law School, Journal of Public Law-Constitutional Conventions and State Legislators, by Doyle W. Buckwalter__ Florida, University of, Law Review-A Limited Federal Constitutional Harvard Journal on Legislation 127 (1973)—Limited Federal Constitu- North Dakota Law Review 1979-Amending the Constitution by the Article V Convention Method, by Douglas G. Voegler................ Ohio State Law Journal-The Mandatory Referendum on Calling a State Constitutional Convention: Enforcing the People's Right to Reform St. Louis University Law Journal-Constitutional Conventions: Prece- dents, Problems, and Proposals, by Thomas A. Gilliam.......... South Dakota Law Review-Confederation v. Union, by George Mc- PART 3-PAST LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Congressional Record, Sept. 5, 1979, statements on Introduced bills and Federal Constitutional Convention, hearings before the Subcommittee on Separation of Powers, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, 90th CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION PROCEDURES THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1979 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 9:55 a.m., room 318, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Birch Bayh (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators Bayh, Thurmond, and Hatch. Staff present: Kevin O. Faley, chief counsel and executive director; Mary K. Jolly, staff director and counsel; Linda Rogers-Kingsbury, deputy staff director and chief clerk; Christie F. Johnson, clerk; John Minor, counsel to Senator Kennedy; Mike Klipper, counsel to Senator Mathias; Tom Perry, minority chief counsel; Steve Markman, minority counsel; Dennis Shedd, counsel to Senator Thurmond; Chip Wood, counsel to Senator Simpson. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BIRCH BAYH, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA, AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION Senator BAYH. Today we will begin to consider an important issue and legislation which could lead to profound alteration in the method by which we amend our Constitution-the hitherto unused provisions of article V of the Constitution providing that the States may petition Congress for a Constitutional Convention. The legislation which is the subject of these hearings would establish procedures both for calling such a Convention and for conducting its business. Throughout these hearings I believe we should keep one thought in mind-calling a Constitutional Convention is the single most significant step our Government could take. We should not underestimate the consequences of this act or the possible unforeseen result of an event such as a Convention, to rewrite the basic law of our land. As we know, the original and only Constitutional Convention, which was held in Philadelphia in 1787, met "for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation". Our country had just concluded a war for our independence and the Government at that time, had no power under the Articles of Confederation to defend the country, collect taxes, or encourage and engage in trade and commerce. The Government for which many fought and suffered was in the midst of another crisis, different from previous experiences, but no less critical. Our country was fighting for its very survival, and as we know, the Articles of Confederation were not amended, but rather replaced with the Constitution of the United States embodying our Bill of Rights. My purpose as a Senator, is to guard and protect this Constitution, to uphold its integrity and to weigh the impact of suggested revisions or amendments in terms of not only our lifetime, but that of our children and grandchildren. The Constitution has endured and survived for almost 200 years and it has succeeded in keeping secure our basic liberties throughout our history. Our responsibility to this document is one of much gravity and one which cannot be dealt with frivolously or without much thought and consideration. As chairman of this subcommittee, I am of course, aware of the petitions which have been received by the Congress calling for a Constitutional Convention on a variety of subjects. I am somewhat concerned that some of these petitions have apparently been adopted by State legislatures with no hearings, and no debate. While I believe there can be little question that the receipt of 34 valid petitions for a convention places an obligation on the Congress to call one, I would hope that our legislatures would carefully consider the consequences of these petitions. I personally do not believe that this is the time to have the wrenching experience of a convention. I recognize however, that we should begin an examination of the questions raised by proposed procedures legislation, before a convention is threatened, to deal with a specific topic, lest views on the substantive issue color what should be neutral decisions about fair procedures. I am on record that we ought to take the middle ground in framing such a bill-avoiding both those procedures which make constitutional change too easy and those which stifle needed reform altogether. Let us recognize that if we establish a procedure whereby a Constitutional Convention can propose a constitutional amendment, that convention will be writing the chapter and verse of a proposed constitutional amendment, just as Congress does and has historically done. The purpose of these hearings is to investigate the many questions that have remained uresolved. In the opinion of some constitutional scholars, some of these questions are unanswerable, even if that is true, we must still make an attempt, we must also make the citizens of the United States aware of the startling realities of the situation. Hopefully these hearings will serve not only that purpose, but also the Constitution. Without objection I will submit copies of S. 3, S. 520, S. 1710, and a prepared statement by Senator Pryor for the record. [Text of S. 3, S. 520, S. 1710, and the prepared statement of Senator David Pryor follows:] To provide procedures for calling constitutional conventions for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States, on application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the States, pursuant to article V of the Constitution. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To provide procedures for calling constitutional conventions for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States, on application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the States, pursuant to article V of the Constitution. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That this Act may be cited as the "Federal Constitutional 4 Convention Procedures Act". 5 6 APPLICATIONS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION SEC. 2. The legislature of a State, in making application 7 to the Congress for a constitutional convention under article |