After the Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787 it had to be approved by 2/3 of the states.
To amend the Constitution the Founding Fathers required 2/3 of both Houses of Congress to approve an amendment. But instead of also requiring 2/3 of the states to approve amendments to the Constitution they set a higher standard of 3/4 of the states to approve amendments.
This makes the Founding Fathers hypocritical. They only required 2/3 of the states to approve the Constitution they wrote in 1787 but require 3/4 of the states to approve future amendments to “their” Constitution.
Our Founding Fathers set a high bar to amend the Constitution to protect it from being changed too easily by political factions. This is exactly what happened in Turkey in 2017 when they changed their constitution by a simple majority referendum vote and replaced their democracy with what amounts to a dictatorship.
Clearly a simple majority is too low a bar to change our Constitution. But requiring 3/4 of the states to approve an amendment is too high a bar. As a result 3/4 is so difficult to achieve that needed and necessary amendments to our Constitution sometimes can’t get passed.
Requiring 2/3 of the states to approve a Constitutional amendment is just the right level: not too low and not too high. 2/3 is enough and would make our Constitution better by allowing more necessary amendments to be passed.
If 2/3 of the states were good enough in 1787 to approve the original Constitution then requiring 2/3 of the states to approve future amendments should also be good enough.
We should propose a “2/3 is Enough” amendment to the Constitution to require only 2/3 of the states to ratify new amendments to the Constitution. Ironically it would require approval by 3/4 of the states to become law.
Add the Thomas Jefferson quote on the need to change the Constitution as the country changes.
Steve Scott, Blogger on Voting and Elections
“Getting more people to vote in free and fair elections”