The Framers And The Emergence Of The Constitution Of 1787

The Framers anticipated that the U.S. Constitution would need to be amended from time to time, what James Madison referred to as “to originate the amendment of errors.” he 55 Framers who met in Philadelphia during the spring and summer of 1787 understood that they were drafting a Constitution to last a very long time. “We are not forming plans for a Day Month Year or Age,” delegate John Dickinson wrote, “but for Eternity.” Of course, a document designed to last a very long time must include a method of amendment. In crafting their amendment procedures, the Framers resorted to two mechanisms widely employed at the time: legislatures and conventions.They also recognized that the States would need the authority to restrain a power-hungry federal

The charters granted by William Penn in 1682 and 1683 provided for amending, as did eight of the state constitutions in effect in 1787. Three state constitutions provided for amendment through the legislature, and the other five gave the power to specially elected conventions. ‘The Framers’ experience with the Articles of Confederation, under which constitutional amendment required approval of all thirteen States, revealed that making constitutional change which is too difficult could block needed reforms. Yet their experience with the ‘mutability’ of State laws also cautioned against making too easy. The Constitution permits amendments to be proposed either by Congress or a Convention made up of delegates elected in various

This article says nothing about the time within which ratification may be had -- neither that it shall be unlimited nor that it shall be fixed by Congress. What then is the reasonable inference or implication? Is it that ratification may be had at any time, as within a few years, a century, or even a longer period, or that it must be had within some reasonable period which Congress is left free to define Congress acting under the ‘Necessary and Proper Clause’ has assumed a supervisory authority over the ratification process. The Congress may set a time limit on the ratification process. Initially, the Congress was reluctant to specify the proper time limit for the ratification process which has led to some undesirable results. Consequently, the 27th Amendment, the most recently ratified, was proposed to the states in 1789 without a seven-year time limit on ratification. It requires that congressional salary increases can take effect only after an intervening election. Despite having been pending for 203 years, this amendment was revived, ratified by more states, and was ultimately declared to have been ratified in 1992. As it is clear from this that not having a proper time limit may at times defeat the purpose of the amendment. The reason with which this amendment was proposed must have lost its importance in 203 years. Twenty-one amendments had been proposed by Congress and seventeen