What two groups may propose amendments to the constitution Gardami / 29.06.202029.06.2020 Article 5 How To Propose Amendments There are only two groups that can propose an amendment to the US Constitution. These groups include the state legislatures and congress. Oct 23, · Under Article 5, Amendments to the Constitution can be proposed in two ways. First, it can be by a two-thirds majority of both the House of Representatives and the Senate (or a quorum of both, meaning the minimum amount necessary to hold a session of. Congress). The second method of proposing Amendments can be done when two-thirds of all State legislatures request that Congress . Asked by Wiki User. There are only two groups that can propose an amendment to the US Constitution. These groups include the state legislatures and congress. To propose an amendment: 1. Two-thirds of both houses of Congress vote to propose an amendment, or 2. Two-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention amedments propose amendments. Either a two-thirds vote of how to get small scratches off phone screen houses of Congress or a national convention can how to get sirius radio in your car an amendment to the Constitution. Article V of the Constitution says, "The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments. To propose an amendmentTwo-thirds of both houses of Congress vote to propose an amendment, orTwo-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendmentsTo ratify an amendmentThree-fourths of the state legislatures approve it, orRatifying conventions in three-fourths of the states approve it. There are two ways to propose and ratify amendments to the Constitution. To propose amendments two thirds of both houses of congress can vote to propose thhe amendment, what two groups may propose amendments to the constitution two thirds of the state legislatures can ask congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. Congress can propose an amendment to the constitution as long as there is a two thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives as well as the Senate. The only other way to propose an amendment would be through a constitutional convention with a two thirds vote from all the states' legislatures. In what year did Congress proppose the amendment? The Amendment process is the amendmenta way to change pieces of the Constitution to better suit the nation's rights. According to Article V, two-thirds of Congress must deem it necessary in order to propose an amendment. To ratify the amendment, three-fourths of the states must approve. Congress and State Legislatures. Amendmentts a balanced budget groyps. Ask Question. US Constitution. See Answer. Constitutipn Answer. Wiki User Answered Related Questions. Which two groups have the power to propose an amendment to the Constitution? How do you propose an amendment via the national convention route? What are two steps to propose an amendment? What two ways can an amendment to the constution be proposed? How many states to propose an amendment? How many formal methods are available to propose an amendment? Who isare the groups that hashave the power to propose an amendment to the constitution? What the two ways to propose an amendment? What are both ways to propose and both propoae to ratify an amendemnt to the Constitution? What fractions of congress must propose an amendment to the constitution? What is the two step process for how to unlock itunes movies mac the constitution? Can congress propose constitutional amendments? What branch of government is able to propose a amendment? What fraction of the states can ask for a convention to propose new amendment? When does congress propose an amendment? What fraction of the member of each house of congress must agree to propose an amendment? What branch propose an amendment? What branch can propose an amendment? Congress can propose an amendment? What two ways can an amendment be proposed? What percentage of congress does it take to propose an amendment? What are two methods for proposing and ratifying amendments to the constitution? What two government groups may propose amendments to the constitution? The Constitution requires a two thirds vote in each house in order for Congress to? If whxt are elected as a US Representative what laws would you propose? What is degrees c into f? What is the fourth element of the periodic table of elements? What day of the week was June 13th ? What 3 figurative languages in book one of fablehaven? Is there a way to search all eBay sites for different countries at once? Is water lily an autotrophic plant? What how to run for local office not a sustainable form of energy production? Hottest Questions How did chickenpox get its name? When did organ music become associated with baseball? How can you cut an onion without crying? Why don't libraries smell like bookstores? How long will the footprints on the moon last? Do animals name each other? Who is the longest reigning WWE Champion of all time? What was the first TV dinner? Previously Viewed What two groups can propose an amendment? Unanswered Questions How can you improve the efficiency of a nested decision? Why bulb of wbc smaller than rbc pipette? What does fan screening mean? What values are exemplified what two groups may propose amendments to the constitution fr hofstee? What Tagalog songs are strophic form? What is moral lesson in rice and bullets? What are small rooms projecting from an apse are called? Why is sally Taylor not on south today at the moment? All Rights Reserved. The material on this site can not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with prior written permission of Multiply. Your Answer Under Article V of the Constitution, there are two ways to propose and ratify amendments to the Constitution. To propose amendments, two-thirds of both houses of Congress can vote to propose an amendment, or two-thirds of the state legislatures can ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. How many states had to ratify the Constitution in order for it to become official? 9 Which two governmental groups may propose amendments to the Constitution providing there is a two-thirds majority vote to do so? Congress and State Legislature. Aug 30, · Congress must call a convention for proposing amendments upon application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states (i.e., 34 of 50 states). Amendments proposed by Congress or convention become valid only when ratified by the legislatures of, or conventions in, three-fourths of the states (i.e., 38 of 50 states). A convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution , also called an Article V Convention or amendatory convention , called for by two-thirds currently 34 of the state legislatures , is one of two processes authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby the United States Constitution may be altered. Amendments may also be proposed by Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment which has been formally proposed must then be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-fourths presently 38 of the states , or state ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states. Thirty-three amendments to the United States Constitution have been approved by Congress and sent to the states for ratification. Twenty-seven of these amendments have been ratified and are now part of the Constitution. As of [update] , the amendment convention process has never been used for proposing a constitutional amendment. While there have been calls for an "Article V Convention" based on a single issue such as the balanced budget amendment , it is not clear whether a convention summoned in this way would be legally bound to limit discussion to a single issue; law professor Michael Stokes Paulsen has suggested that such a convention would have the "power to propose anything it sees fit",  whereas law professor Michael Rappaport  and attorney-at-law Robert Kelly  believe that a limited convention is possible. In recent years, some have argued that state governments should call for such a convention. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Their resolution has passed in five states. Eight state constitutions in effect at the time of the Constitutional Convention convened in Philadelphia included an amendment mechanism. Amendment-making power rested with the legislature in three of the states and in the other five it was given to specially elected conventions. The Articles of Confederation provided that amendments were to be proposed by Congress and ratified by the unanimous vote of all thirteen state legislatures. This was seen by the Federalists as a major flaw in the Articles, as it created a nearly insurmountable obstacle to constitutional reform. It guards equally against that extreme facility which would render the Constitution too mutable; and that extreme difficulty which might perpetuate its discovered faults. It moreover equally enables the General and the State Governments to originate the amendment of errors, as they may be pointed out by the experience on one side, or on the other. One of the main reasons for the Convention was that the Articles of Confederation required the unanimous consent of all 13 states for the national government to take action. This system had proved unworkable, and the newly written Constitution sought to address this problem. The first proposal for a method of amending the Constitution offered in the Constitutional Convention, contained in the Virginia Plan , sought to circumvent the national legislature, stating that "the assent of the National Legislature ought not to be required. During the debate on the Committee of Detail's report, James Madison expressed concern about the lack of detail in the article regarding how the convention amendment process would work, stating that "difficulties might arise as to the form" a convention would take. A frequent question is whether applications from the states can omit to mention subject matter, and instead request an unlimited convention. Past practice suggests that separate unlimited applications submitted to Congress at different times are not allowed. States have requested that Congress convene an Article V convention to propose amendments on a variety of subjects. According to the National Archives , Congress has, however, never officially tabulated the applications, nor separated them by subject matter. In two law review articles in and again in , Paulsen argued that state applications for an Article V convention limited to a particular subject matter are invalid and that only applications that include a call for an unrestricted convention are valid. Paulsen argues that Congress has had ample direction to call a convention on these grounds. There has been no definitive determination by the Supreme Court regarding the state convention amendment method, though it has handled several cases and an array of arguments on the scope which Amendments can ultimately affect. The case Coleman v. Miller, which questioned whether a state legislature could relinquish endorsement of an Amendment pertaining to child labor, decided in part, "the question whether a reasonable time had elapsed since submission of the proposal was a nonjusticiable political question, the kinds of considerations entering into deciding being fit for Congress to evaluate, and the question of the effect of a previous rejection upon a ratification was similarly nonjusticiable, because the Fourteenth Amendment precedent of congressional determination 'has been accepted. Because no Article V convention has ever been convened, there are various questions about how such a convention would function in practice. One major question is whether the scope of the convention's subject matter could be limited. The language of Article V leaves no discretion to Congress, merely stating that Congress "shall" call a convention when the proper number of state applications have been received. Comments made at the time the Constitution was adopted indicate that it was understood when the Constitution was drafted that Congress would have no discretion. In The Federalist , Alexander Hamilton stated that when the proper number of applications had been received, Congress was "obliged" to call a convention and that "nothing is left to the discretion of Congress. In the North Carolina debates about ratifying the Constitution, James Iredell , who subsequently became one of the founding members of the Supreme Court, stated that when two-thirds of states have applied to Congress for a convention, Congress is "under the necessity of convening one" and that they have "no option. By citing the Constitution's Necessary and Proper Clause , Congress has tried to enact a statute to regulate how an Article V convention would function. Sponsored by the late Senator Sam Ervin , such a bill passed the U. Senate unanimously in and again in ,  but the proposed legislation remained bottled up in the Committee on the Judiciary in the U. House of Representatives and died both times. Senator Orrin Hatch made a similar proposal several times in the late s culminating in with no more success. Opponents to congressional regulation of an Article V convention's operations argue that neither Article I nor Article V of the Constitution grants Congress this power, and that the Founders intended that Congress "have no option. Some scholars believe that states have the power to limit the scope of an Article V convention: Larry Sabato is one scholar who advanced that view. If the states, therefore, request a convention limited to a certain subject matter, then the convention that is called would likely need to be limited in the way the states requested. If states have the power to limit an Article V convention to a particular subject matter, and Congress only has power to call a convention but no further power to control or regulate it, then a potential concern becomes whether an Article V convention could become a "runaway convention" that attempts to exceed its scope. If a convention did attempt to exceed its scope, none of the amendments it proposed would become part of the constitution until three-fourths of the states ratified them, which is more states than are required to call a convention in the first place. Further, at many Conventions, States have directly controlled their delegates. In the New Hampshire Convention to ratify the U. Constitution, delegates were sent with instructions to vote against the Constitution: when they were convinced that the voters had been mistaken, the delegates later returned to their constituents to convince them and request new instructions, allowing the Convention to represent the true voice of the people. Similarly, in the Convention, problems arose after two of New York's delegates walked out in protest, as the New York State Legislature had created a rule that required two delegates to agree to cast a vote on behalf of the state. As the legislature opted not to send new delegates, Alexander Hamilton accepted the authority of the state and was unable to cast a vote for the remainder of the Convention. This is the fundamental difference between a Delegate to a Convention, there to do the bidding of their constituents, and a Representative to a Legislature, there to stand in place of their constituents and make decisions based on their own deliberation. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention did disregard Congress's recommendation to "solely amend the Articles"  but as Madison noted in Federalist No. Congress debated the matter before voting to send it on to the States for ratification with no recommendation for or against. The legislatures of some states have adopted rescissions of their prior applications. It is not clear from the language of Article V whether a subsequent vote to rescind an application is permissible. As discussed above, however, if the purpose of Article V is to give state legislatures power over a recalcitrant Congress—and if state lawmakers may indeed limit their applications by specific subject matter—it is possible that federal courts would hold that rescissions of previous applications are likewise valid, in order to give more meaningful effect to the power which Article V confers upon state legislators. If it is ultimately adjudicated that a state may not rescind a prior application, then Ohio's application for a balanced budget amendment convention would be the 33rd and Michigan's application would be the 34th out of the necessary 34 on that topic, rather than the 20th and 22nd, respectively. Those [ who? Congress has more than enough applications on a single issue to call a convention—if rescission is not valid—and more than enough applications on multiple topics regardless of rescissions. Consequently, if a State believes that combining topics could be done by Congress, even if a State feels that doing so would be contrary to the intent of the Constitution, then that State would also have to conclude that Congress can ignore rescission. Since , four state legislatures Delaware in and New Mexico, Maryland and Nevada in have rescinded previous applications to call for a convention on the topic of a federal balanced budget amendment. While the Supreme Court has never definitively interpreted the meaning of Article V, it has, on four separate occasions, referred to the Article V convention process:. Dodge v. Woolsey , 59 U. Hawke v. Smith , U. The proposed change can only become effective by the ratification of the legislatures of three-fourths of the states or by conventions in a like number of states. The method of ratification is left to the choice of Congress. Dillon v. Gloss U. United States v. Sprague , U. It provides two methods for proposing amendments. Congress may propose them by a vote of two-thirds of both houses, or, on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the States, must call a convention to propose them. Because of the political question doctrine and the Court's ruling in the case of Coleman v. Miller U. Every state except Hawaii has applied for an Article V Convention at one time or another. The majority of such applications were made in the 20th century. Before any official count had been taken, one private count puts the total number of applications at over The United States House of Representatives is in the process of building its own official count which currently stands at over with 35 states having current live calls that have not been rescinded. This is an underestimate as it so far does not include anything before the s and there are many known Convention calls subsequent to which are not yet included in the House's to tally. Both Wolf-PAC and the Convention of the States estimate, based on spot checking, that the real figure is in the range of calls. Even though the Article V Convention process has never been used to amend the Constitution, the number of states applying for a convention has nearly reached the required threshold several times. Congress has proposed amendments to the Constitution on some occasions, at least in part, because of the threat of an Article V Convention. Rather than risk such a convention taking control of the amendment process away from it, Congress acted pre-emptively to propose the amendments instead. The Bill of Rights , which includes the first ten amendments, as well as the Twenty-seventh Amendment , were proposed in part because of a Convention application by the New York and Virginia legislatures at the suggestion of a letter from the New York State Convention to ratify the Constitution. The Convention would have been limited to those changes discussed at the various State ratifying Conventions. At least four other amendments the Seventeenth , Twenty-First , Twenty-Second , and Twenty-Fifth Amendments have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention, bringing the total to 15 out of 27, a majority of the Amendments. In the late s, the House of Representatives passed multiple resolutions for a constitutional amendment providing for direct election of senators. The Senate refused to consider those resolutions. By , 29 states  had Article V convention applications on file for an amendment providing for direct election of senators, just two short of the state threshold. The final count is somewhat uncertain, but when either one or two further states were required the Senate finally conceded and passed its version of an amendment in May , which was then approved by the House in and submitted to the states. There have been two nearly successful attempts to amend the Constitution via an Article V Convention since the late s. The first try was an attempt to propose an amendment that would overturn two Supreme Court decisions, Wesberry v. Sanders and Reynolds v. Sims , decisions that required states to adhere to the one man, one vote principle in drawing electoral districts for state and federal elections. The attempt fell only one state short of reaching the 34 needed to force Congress to call a convention in , but ended by the death of its main promoter Senator Everett Dirksen. After this peak, several states whose legislatures by this point had been re-engineered in the wake of the rulings rescinded their applications, and interest in the proposed amendment subsided. In response to increasing federal deficits, a movement in the s by the states to impose fiscal discipline on the federal government began.