List of state applications for an Article V Convention

This is a list of known applications made to the United States Congress by the states for a national convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution under Article five of the Constitution.

The Congress, ..., on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments ...

Historically, Congress did not keep a formal record of applications received from the states for such a convention, beyond verbatim publication (or at least summarization) in the Congressional Record. However, on January 6, 2015 Congress began the process of counting applications submitted by the states with the passage of a House rule in the House of Representatives. The rule calls for publication of all applications for a convention "made in pursuance of Article V" as well as state legislators' rescissions of such applications. Notably the rule does not describe rescissions as being "in pursuance" of Article V.[1] In 1990, Judge Bruce Van Sickle and attorney Lynn M. Boughey compiled a list from the Congressional Record of state applications for an Article V Convention in the Hamline Law Review. This list of applications has been expanded and maintained by the organization Friends of the Article V Convention (FOAVC), which sponsored a complete review of the Congressional Record from 2008–2010. Whether the House of Representatives in future Congresses retains this Rule, and continues to compile and publish Article V Convention applications and rescissions, remains to be seen.

FOAVC has recently published the applications listed by amendment subject and by numeric count of applying states. Based on photographic copies of applications already submitted to Congress, the amendment subject list shows that at least four different amendment subjects have achieved the necessary two thirds mark to cause a convention. However FOAVC maintains amendment subject is the incorrect method to count applications as the text of Article V does not describe same subject. Instead it favors a simple numeric count of applying states as described by Article V, Supreme Court rulings, statements of Congress and historic records.[2] This list shows that ten conventions are currently mandated to be called[3][4]

On May 24, 2016 Congressman Luke Messer (R-Indiana) submitted H.R. 5306 to Congress. The purpose of the legislation is to create the first official list of Article V Convention applications in United States history and has received bi-partisan support in Congress. The bill requires the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to conduct a search of all congressional records in NARA and produce copies of all applications submitted by the states since 1789.[5]

Legislation offered in Congress to actually call an Article V Convention

In January 1975, during the 94th Congress, U.S. Congressman Jerry Pettis, a Republican from California, introduced House Concurrent Resolution No. 28, calling a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. In H.Con.Res. 28, Pettis proposed that each state would be entitled to send as many delegates to the convention as it had Senators and Representatives in Congress and that such delegates would be selected in the manner designated by the legislature of each state. With Pettis' death, his colleague, Representative Norman F. Lent, a Republican from New York, introduced similar legislation, House Concurrent Resolution No. 340, in August 1977, for the consideration of the 95th Congress. Both the Pettis and Lent concurrent resolutions received no further consideration than to be referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Van Sickle-Boughey classification

In "A Lawful and Peaceful Revolution",[6] Van Sickle and Boughey define five classifications of applications:

  • Class I: A call for a general convention, with no motivating issue listed
  • Class II: A call for a general convention, with a separate statement of proposed amendment or explicit statement that the convention may consider other amendments proposed by states
  • Class III: A call for a general convention tied to a proposed amendment
  • Class IV: A call for a convention, with language aimed to limit the convention to the issue presented
  • Class V: A call for a convention, with language to rescind the application from consideration for a convention if any other topic is to be covered

The following is added to this list, where the original text was not recorded in the Congressional Record:

  • Class ??: A note of an application without the actual text

Van Sickle and Boughey indicate which applications have been rescinded by their state by encasing these in parentheses, and make no note of which applications have led to amendments proposed by Congress.

It is unclear from the language of Article V—and subject to debate—as to whether an application, once made by a state legislature, may be subsequently rescinded by that state's legislature. It is also unclear whether Congress proposing an amendment negates all applications directed toward that topic.

In the table below, the classification of rescinded applications are stricken, with the year of rescission given in parentheses and a link to the record of the rescission. Those applications which lead to amendments proposed by Congress are listed in parentheses.

List of state applications for an Article V convention

Applications are sorted by date passed by the state, or by date of record in the congressional record. Application classes are encased in parentheses if congress presented an amendment on the topic given and stricken if the state has rescinded its application. All descriptions with six or more states have identical amendment text, unless specified. As of September 2018, only the Legislature of Hawaii has never approved an Article V convention application.

State Applications for an Article V Convention
State Issue/Subject Date of State's Approval Receipt by Congress Class (or Year of Rescission)
Virginia Bill of Rights November 14, 1788 AC V.1 258-259 (II)
New York Bill of Rights February 5, 1789 AC V.1 282Text (II)
Georgia Clarify Amendment X December 12, 1832 J HR V22.2 270-271 II 2004
South Carolina Clarify Amendment X December 19, 1832 J HR V22.2 219-220 II 2004
Alabama Limitation on Tariffs January 12, 1833 J HR V22.2 361-362 II
Indiana General and Unlimited Article V Convention March 13, 1861? CG V.37.S 1465-6 I
Ohio General and Unlimited Article V Convention March 20, 1861 1861 Ohio Laws 181 I
New Jersey Final Resolution for Slavery February 1, 1861 CG V. 36.2 p. 681 (II)
Kentucky Final Resolution for Slavery February 5, 1861 CG V.36.2 p. 773 (II)
Illinois Final Resolution for Slavery February 28, 1861 CG V.36.2 p. 1270 (??)
Nebraska Direct Election of Senators, Other April 14, 1893 1893 Neb. Laws 466-7 III
Texas General and Unlimited Article V Convention June 5, 1899? Cong. Rec. Vol. 33, p. 219 ("Concurrent resolution, S.C.R. No. 4") I
Minnesota Direct Election of Senators, Other February 13, 1901? CR V.34 p.2561 (III)
Pennsylvania Direct Election of Senators, II February 13, 1901? CR V.45 p.7118 (III)
Idaho Direct Election of President, Vice-President and Senators February 14, 1901? CR V.45 p.7114 III 1999
Montana Direct Election of Senators, II
Direct Election of Senators, II		 February 21, 1901?
January 31, 1905?		 CR V.35 p.208
CR V.39 p.2447		 (III) 2007
(III) 2007
Oregon Direct Election of Senators, Other
Direct Election of Senators, I
Direct Election of Senators, Other		 February 23, 1901?
March 10, 1903?
January 26, 1909?		 CR V.35 p.117
CR V.45 p.7118
CR V.43 p.2025		 (III) 2000
(III) 2000
(III) 2000
Tennessee Direct Election of Senators, II
Direct Election of Senators, Other		 March 27, 1901?
March 14, 1905?		 CR V.35 p.2344
CR V.45 p.7119		 (III) 2010
(III)
Colorado Direct Election of Senators, I April 1, 1901? CR V.45 p.7113 (II)
Michigan Direct Election of Senators, Other April 9, 1901? CR V.35 p.117 (III)
Texas Direct Election of Senators, I April 17, 1901? CR V.45 p.7119 (II)
Arkansas Direct Election of Senators, Other April 25, 1901? CR V.45 p.7113 (III)
Kentucky Direct Election of Senators, II February 10, 1902? CR V.45 p.7115 (III)
Illinois Direct Election of Senators, I
Direct Election of Senators, Other		 February 10, 1903?
May 23, 1907?		 CR V.45 p.7114
CR V.42 p.164		 (II)
(III)
Nevada Direct Election of Senators, II February 25, 1903? CR V.37 p.24 (III)
Utah Direct Election of Senators, I March 12, 1903? CR V.45 p.7119 III 2001
Washington Direct Election of Senators, Other March 12, 1903? CR V.45 p.7119 (II)
Nebraska Direct Election of Senators, I March 25, 1903? CR V.45 p.7116-7 (III)
Iowa Direct Election of Senators, I March 24, 1904? CR V.38 p.4959 (III)
Missouri Direct Election of Senators, II March 18, 1905? CR V.40 p.1905 (III)
South Dakota Direct Election of Senators, Other
Direct Election of Senators, I		 February 2, 1907?
February 9, 1909?		 CR V.41 p.1907
CR V.43 p.2667-2668		 (III)
(III)
Delaware Anti-Polygamy February 11, 1907? CR V.41 p.3011 III 2016
Missouri General and Unlimited Article V Convention March 6, 1907? CR V.45 p.7116 I
Indiana Direct Election of Senators, Other March 11, 1907? CR V.45 p.7114 (II)
Iowa Direct Election of Senators, Other March 12, 1907? CR V.45 p.7114-5 (II)
Nevada Direct Election of Senators, I March 23, 1907? CR V.42 p.163 (II)
New Jersey Direct Election of Senators, I May 28, 1907? CR V.42 p.164 (III)
Louisiana Direct Election of Senators, Other November 25, 1907? CR V.42 p.5906 (II) 1990
Oklahoma Direct Election of Senators, Other January 20, 1908? CR V.45 p.7117-8 (II) 2009
South Dakota Anti-Polygamy February 6, 1909? CR V.43 p.2670 III
Kansas Direct Election of Senators, I March 6, 1909? CR V.45 p.7115 (II)
Wisconsin Direct Election of Senators, I May 31, 1910? CR V.45 p.7119-20 (III)
Washington Anti-Polygamy September 1, 1910? CR V.46 p.651 III
Montana Direct Election of Senators, Other January 20, 1911? CR V.46 p.2411 (II) 2007
Maine Direct Election of Senators, Other February 22, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 46, p. 4280 ("Joint resolution") (III)
Tennessee Anti-Polygamy February 17, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 47, p. 187 ("Senate joint resolution 43") III 2010
Montana Anti-Polygamy March 1, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 47, pp. 98-99 ("House joint memorial 7") remainder of text p. 99 III 2007
Nebraska Anti-Polygamy March 14, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 47, p. 99 ("Joint resolution by House and Senate of Nebraska Legislature") III
Ohio Anti-Polygamy March 15, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 47, pp. 660-661 ("House joint resolution 13") remainder of text p. 661 III
Illinois Prevent and Suppress Monopolies May 11, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 47, p. 1298 ("House joint resolution 9") III
Wisconsin General and Unlimited Article V Convention June 12, 1911? Cong. Rec. Vol. 47, p. 1873 ("Joint resolution (J. Res. 15, S.)") I
California Direct Election of Senators, I June 13, 1911? CR V.47 p.2000 (??)
Vermont Anti-Polygamy December 18, 1912? Cong. Rec. Vol. 49, p. 1433 ("Joint resolution") III
Illinois Anti-Polygamy March 12, 1913? Cong. Rec. Vol. 50, pp. 120-121 (Senate joint resolution 12") remainder of text p. 121 III
Oregon Anti-Polygamy January 20, 1913? Cong. Rec. Vol. 49, p. 2463 ("Senate joint resolution 2") III 2000
Wisconsin Anti-Polygamy March 26, 1913? Cong. Rec. Vol. 50, pp. 42-43 (No number, or resolution type, is given for this resolution) remainder of text p. 43 See, also, Cong. Rec. Vol. 50, p. 116 III
Missouri Supreme Court Jurisdiction April 15, 1913? Cong. Rec. Vol. 50, p. 2428 ("House joint and concurrent resolution 23") III
Michigan Anti-Polygamy July 2, 1913? Cong. Rec. Vol. 50, p. 2290 ("House resolution No. 120") III
South Carolina Anti-Polygamy February 15, 1915? Cong. Rec. Vol. 53, p. 2442 ("Concurrent resolution") III 2004
Louisiana Mode of Amendment, Other January 12, 1920? CR V.60 p.31 ?? 1990
Nevada Anti-Prohibition December 7, 1925? CR V.67 p.458 (??)
Wisconsin Direct Election of President and VP December 7, 1925? CR V.67 p.458 (??)
Wisconsin General and Unlimited Article V Convention June 10, 1929 Cong. Rec. Vol. 71, p. 2590 ("Senate Joint Resolution 65") (??)
Wisconsin Article V Requirements Already Met for Convention Call September 4, 1929? Cong. Rec. Vol. 71, p. 3369 ("Senate Joint Resolution 83") (??)
Wisconsin Article V Requirements Already Met for Convention Call September 23, 1929? Cong. Rec. Vol. 71, p. 3856 ("Joint Resolution No. 83, S.") (??)
Massachusetts Anti-Prohibition March 13, 1931? Cong. Rec. Vol. 75, p. 45 ("Resolutions") (III)
New York Anti-Prohibition December 8, 1931? Cong. Rec. Vol. 75, p. 48 ("Assembly 4") (IV)
Wisconsin Anti-Prohibition December 8, 1931? Cong. Rec. Vol. 75, p. 57 ("Joint resolution") (III)
New Jersey Anti-Prohibition February 1, 1932? Cong. Rec. Vol. 75, p. 3299 ("Joint Resolution 1") (III)
California Tax on Government Securities July 9, 1935? Cong. Rec. Vol. 79, p. 10814 ("Senate joint resolution") III
California Federal Labor Laws July 9, 1935? Cong. Rec. Vol. 79, p. 10814 ("Senate Joint Resolution 23") III
Oregon General Welfare Act of 1937 ("Townsend National Recovery Plan") February 1, 1939? Cong. Rec. Vol. 84, p. 985 ("House Joint Memorial 1") III 2000
Wyoming Income Tax, Limit II March 8, 1939? Cong. Rec. Vol. 84, pp. 2509-2510 ("House Joint Memorial 4") remainder of text p. 2510 III 2009
Maryland Income Tax, Limit II March 27, 1939? Cong. Rec. Vol. 84, p. 3320 ("House resolution") appearing to have been approved only by the Maryland House of Delegates—and NOT at all by the Maryland Senate III
Rhode Island Income Tax, Limit I March 26, 1940? Cong. Rec. Vol. 86, p. 3407 ("Resolution") III
Iowa Income Tax, Limit II April 18, 1941? Cong. Rec. Vol. 87, p. 3172 ("House Concurrent Resolution 15") III
Maine Income Tax, Limit I April 17, 1941? Cong. Rec. Vol. 87, pp. 3370-3371 ("Resolution") remainder of text p. 3371 III 1953
Massachusetts Income Tax, Limit I April 29, 1941? Cong. Rec. Vol. 87, pp. 3812-3813 ("Resolutions") remainder of text p. 3813 III 1952
Michigan Income Tax, Limit I May 16, 1941? Cong. Rec. Vol. 87, p. 4537 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution 20") III
Iowa Presidential Term Limits March 26, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, p. 2516 ("House Concurrent Resolution 26") (III)
Illinois Presidential Term Limits March 26, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, pp. 2516-2517 ("Senate Joint Resolution 8") remainder of text p. 2517 (III)
Michigan Presidential Term Limits April 6, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, p. 2944 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution 24") (III)
New Hampshire Income Tax, II April 29, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, pp. 3761-3762 ("A concurrent resolution") remainder of text p. 3762 III 2010
Delaware Income Tax, Limit I May 3, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, p. 4017 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution 6") III 2016
Illinois Income Tax, Limit II May 26, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, pp. 742-743 (HJR 32) remainder of text p. 743 III 1952
Pennsylvania Limited Funding Mandates, Various May 27, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, p. 8220 ("Joint resolution") III
Pennsylvania Income Tax, Limit II May 27, 1943? CR V.89 pp.8220-8221 ("[House Concurrent resolution [No. 50]"] III
Alabama Income Tax, Limit I July 8, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, pp. 7523-7524 ("House Joint Resolution 66") remainder of text p. 7524 III
Wisconsin Income Tax, Limit I September 14, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, p. 7524 ("Assembly Joint Resolution 55") III
Wisconsin Presidential Term Limits September 14, 1943? Cong. Rec. Vol. 89, p. 7525 ("Joint Resolution No. 38, A") (III)
Kentucky Income Tax, Limit I March 20, 1944? Cong. Rec. Vol. 90, pp. 4040-4041 ("House Resolution 79") remainder of text p. 4041 III 1951
New Jersey Income Tax, Limit I February 25, 1944? CR V.90 p.6141 III 1954
California World Federation April 14, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, pp. 4568-4569 ("Assembly Joint Resolution 26") remainder of text p. 4569 IV
New Jersey World Federation April 14, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, p. 4571 ("Assembly Concurrent Resolution 17") IV
North Carolina World Federation April 20, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, pp. 6587-6588 ("Resolution 37") remainder of text p. 6588 IV
Michigan Revenue Sharing, II May 5, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, pp. 5628-5629 (HCR 26) remainder of text p. 5629 IV
Florida World Federation May 16, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, p. 7000 ("Senate Memorial 282") III 2010
Nebraska Revenue Sharing, II May 25, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, pp. 7893-7894 ("Legislative Resolution 32") remainder of text p. 7894 IV 1953
Connecticut World Federation June 1, 1949? Cong. Rec. Vol. 95, p. 7689 ("Joint Resolution") IV
Kansas Income Tax, Limit I March 28, 1951? Cong. Rec. Vol. 97, p. 2936 (SCR 4) III
Iowa Revenue Sharing, II April 17, 1951? Cong. Rec. Vol. 97, pp. 3939-3940 (SCR 11) remainder of text p. 3940 IV
Florida Income Tax, Limit I May 10, 1951? Cong. Rec. Vol. 97, pp. 5155-5156 (SCR 206) remainder of text p. 5156 III 2010
Maine Revenue Sharing, II June 4, 1951? Cong. Rec. Vol. 97, pp. 6033-6034 ("Joint Resolution") remainder of text p. 6034 IV
New Hampshire Revenue Sharing, II August 28, 1951? Cong. Rec. Vol. 97, pp. 10716-10717 ("Concurrent Resolution") remainder of text p. 10717 IV 2010
Arkansas Income Tax, Limit II February 4, 1952? Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, p. 742 (SCR 10) III
Utah Income Tax, Limit I February 11, 1952? Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, p. 947 ("Joint Resolution") III 2001
New Mexico Revenue Sharing, II February 11, 1952? Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, pp. 947-948 (HJR 12) p. 948 IV
Georgia Limited Treaty Powers, Various January 29, 1952? CR V.98 p.1057 III 2004
Georgia Income Tax, Limit I February 6, 1952? CR V.98 p.1057 III 2004
Indiana Income Tax, Limit II
Income Tax, Limit II		 February 18, 1952?
March 12, 1957?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, pp. 1056-1057 (HCR 10) remainder of text p. 1057
Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, pp. 6474-6475 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution 8") remainder of text p. 6475		 III
III
Virginia Income Tax, Limit I February 21, 1952? Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, p. 1496 (HJR 32) III
California Motor Vehicle Tax Distribution April 16, 1952? Cong. Rec. Vol. 98, pp. 4003-4004 (AJR 8) remainder of text p. 4004 III
Louisiana Income Tax, Limit I January 13, 1953? Cong. Rec. Vol. 99, p. 320 ("Concurrent resolution") remainder of text p. 321 III 1954
South Dakota Mode of Amendment, Other
Mode of Amendment, by 12 States
Mode of Amendment, Identical Text		 March 5, 1953?
February 15, 1955?
March 2, 1963?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 99, pp. 9180-9181 (SJR 4) remainder of text p. 9181
Cong. Rec. Vol. 101, pp. 2861-2862 (SJR 5) remainder of text p. 2862
Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 14638-14639 (SJR 1) remainder of text p. 14639		 IV 2010
IV 2010
III 2010
Illinois Mode of Amendment, Other
Mode of Amendment, Identical Text		 June 25, 1953?
March 5, 1963?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 99, p. 9864 (HJR 37)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 3788 (SJR 4)		 IV
III
Georgia School Management, States' Right
School Management, States' Right
School Management, States' Right		 January 31, 1955?
February 5, 1959?
March 4, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 101, p. 1532 ("Resolution")
Cong. Rec. Vol. 105, p. 1834 (HR 99)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 5817 (HR 128-212)		 III 2004
III 2004
III 2004
Texas Mode of Amendment, by 12 States
Mode of Amendment, Identical Text		 March 14, 1955?
April 4, 1963?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 101, pp. 2770-2771 (SCR 15) remainder of text p. 2771
Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 11852 (HCR 21)		 IV
III
Oklahoma Income Tax, Limit Other May 23, 1955? Cong. Rec. Vol. 101, pp. 8397-8398 (SJR 15) remainder of text p. 8398 (referred to the Committee on Finance rather than to the Committee on the Judiciary) III 2009
Michigan Mode of Amendment, by 12 States April 4, 1956? Cong. Rec. Vol. 102, pp. 7240-7241 (HCR 8) remainder of text p. 7241 IV
Idaho Mode of Amendment, by 12 States April 1, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103 pp. 4831-4832 (HCR 6) remainder of text p. 4832 IV 1999
Indiana Mode of Amendment, by 12 States March 12, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, pp. 6471-6472 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution 2") remainder of text p. 6472 IV
Indiana Limited Treaty Powers, Various March 12, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, pp. 6472-6473 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution 4") remainder of text p. 6473 III
Indiana Proportional Electoral College, Other March 12, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, pp. 6473-6474 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution 7") remainder of text p. 6474 III
Indiana Repeal of Constitution's 16th Amendment March 12, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, pp. 6474-6475 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution 8") remainder of text p. 6475 III
Indiana Balanced Budget, Other
Balanced Budget, Other		 March 12, 1957?
January 26, 1976?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, pp. 6475-6476 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution 9") remainder of text p. 6476
Cong. Rec. Vol. 122, p. 931 ("Concurrent Resolution")		 III
III
Florida Supreme Court Review, Other June 5, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, p. 12787 (SCR 116) III 2010
Alabama Judicial Term Limits June 25, 1957? Cong. Rec. Vol. 103, p. 10863 (SJR 47) III
Connecticut Prohibit Interstate Income Tax May 6, 1958? Cong. Rec. Vol. 104, pp. 8085-8086 (SJR 9) remainder of text p. 8086 III
Alabama Limited Federal Preemption January 1, 1959? Cong. Rec. Vol. 105, p. 3083 (SJR 2) III
Wyoming Limit Federal Powers February 26, 1959? Cong. Rec. Vol. 105, pp. 3085-3086 ("Enrolled Joint Resolution 2") remainder of text p. 3086 III 2009
Arkansas Validity of 14th Amendment March 18, 1959? Cong. Rec. Vol. 105, p. 4398 (HCR 24) III
Nevada Limit Federal Powers March 11, 1960? Cong. Rec. Vol. 106, p. 10749 (SJR 7) III
Louisiana Limit Federal Powers June 11, 1960? Cong. Rec. Vol. 106, p. 14401 (HCR 22) III 1990
Arkansas Supreme Court Review, Other February 2, 1961? Cong. Rec. Vol. 107, p. 2154 (HCR 14) III
Wyoming Balanced Budget, Other
Balanced Budget, Emergency		 February 21, 1961?
February 8, 1979?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 107, p. 2759 ("Enrolled Joint Resolution 4")
CR V.125 p.2116		 III 2009
IV 2009
Georgia Supreme Court Review, Other March 9, 1961? Cong. Rec. Vol. 107, p. 4715 (SR 39) III 2004
South Carolina Limit Federal Powers March 11, 1962? Cong. Rec. Vol. 108, p. 5051 ("Concurrent Resolution") III 2004
Oklahoma Mode of Amendment, Identical Text January 21, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 1172 ("Enrolled Senate Concurrent Resolution 2") III 2009
Oklahoma Apportionment of Legislature, I January 21, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 1172-1173 ("Enrolled Senate Concurrent Resolution 3") remainder of text p. 1173 III 2009
Kansas Mode of Amendment, Identical Text January 31, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2769 (SCR 3) III 1970
Kansas Apportionment of Legislature, I January 31, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2769 (SCR 4) III 1970
Florida Supreme Court Review, Court of the Union February 5, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 2071-2072 ("Senate Memorial 12-X(63)" remainder of text p. 2072 III 2010
Florida Mode of Amendment, Identical Text February 5, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2072 ("Senate Memorial 13-X(63)" III 2010
Idaho Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 February 14, 1963?
January 26, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2281 (SJM 4)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 1229 (SJM 1)		 III 1999
III 1999
Arkansas Mode of Amendment, Identical Text February 21, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2768 (HJR 2) III
Arkansas Supreme Court Review, Court of the Union February 21, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 2768-2769 (HJR 3) remainder of text p. 2769 III
Arkansas Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 February 21, 1963?
April 5, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2769 (HJR 4)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 6917-6918 (SJR 1) remainder of text p. 6918		 III
III
Arkansas Proportional Electoral College, Other February 21, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 2769 (HJR 12) III
South Dakota Proportional Electoral College, Other March 11, 1963? CR V.109 p.3982 ??
Montana Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 March 11, 1963?
February 17, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 3854 (SJR 15)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 2777 ("A Joint Resolution")		 III 2007
III 2007
Idaho Balanced Budget, Other March 11, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 3855 ("SJM 9") III 1999
Montana Proportional Electoral College, I March 25, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 4469 ("HJR 13") III 2007
Wyoming Supreme Court Review, Court of the Union February 14, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109 pp. 4778-4779 ("Enrolled Joint Resolution 2") remainder of text p. 4779 III 2009
Wyoming Apportionment of Legislature, I February 9, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 4779 ("Enrolled Joint Memorial 14") III 2009
Wyoming Mode of Amendment, Identical Text February 15, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 4779 ("Enrolled Joint Memorial 15") III 2009
Alabama Supreme Court Review, Court of the Union March 13, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 5250 (HJR 13) III
Washington Apportionment of Legislature, I March 30, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 5867 (HJM 1) III
Missouri Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 April 8, 1963?
February 22, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 5868 (HCR 4)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 3304 (HCR 2)		 III
III
Missouri Mode of Amendment, Identical Text April 8, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 5868 (HCR 5) III
Utah Proportional Electoral College, I April 8, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 5947 (HCR 1) III 2001
Colorado Proportional Electoral College, I April 11, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 6659 (HJM 4) III
Colorado Income Tax, Limit Other April 25, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 7060 (SJM 9) III
Nevada Apportionment of Legislature, I February 12, 1963?
February 17, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 9942 (SJR 2) III
South Carolina Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 June 10, 1963?
February 18, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 10441 ("House Concurrent Resolution")
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 3304 ("Concurrent Resolution")		 III 2004
South Carolina Apportionment of Legislature, I June 10, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 10442 (SCR 149) III 2004
South Carolina Mode of Amendment, Identical Text June 10, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 10441 ("House Concurrent Resolution") III 2004
South Carolina Mode of Amendment, Identical Text June 10, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 10442 (SCR 148) III 2004
South Carolina Supreme Court Review, Court of the Union June 10, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 10441-10442 ("House Concurrent Resolution") remainder of text p. 10442 III 2004
South Carolina Supreme Court Review, Court of the Union June 10, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 10442-10443 (SCR 147) remainder of text p. 10443 III 2004
Texas Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 April 4, 1963?
July 26, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 11852 (HCR 22)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 18171 (SCR 24)		 III
III
Texas Proportional Electoral College, I May 22, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, pp. 11852-11853 (HCR 29) remainder of text p. 11853 III
South Dakota Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 March 2, 1963?
March 1, 1965?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 14639 (SJR 2)
Cong. Rec. Vol.111, pp.3722-3723 ("Joint resolution") remainder of text p. 3723		 III 2010
III
Wisconsin Proportional Electoral College, I March 2, 1963? Cong. Rec. Vol. 109, p. 14808 (Resolution Number Not Provided) III
Virginia Apportionment of Legislature, I
Apportionment of Legislature, II		 March 15, 1964?
December 3, 1964?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 110, p. 5659 (HJR 90)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 880-881 (HJR 6) remainder of text p. 881		 III
III
Massachusetts School Management, Other March 18, 1964? Cong. Rec. Vol. 110, p. 7616 (Unnumbered resolution) appearing to have been approved only by the Massachusetts House of Representatives—and NOT at all by the Massachusetts Senate III
Massachusetts Senior Pensions April 23, 1964? Cong. Rec. Vol. 110, p. 9875 (Unnumbered resolution) III
Virginia Mode of Amendment, Identical Text December 3, 1964? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 880 (HJR 5) III
Louisiana School Management, States' Right January 6, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 164-165 (SCR 3) remainder of text p. 165 III 1990
Arizona Apportionment of Legislature, II February 18, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 3061 (HCM 1) III 2003
Kansas Apportionment of Legislature, II January 27, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 3061-3062 (SCR 1) remainder of text p. 3062 III 1970
South Carolina School Management, States' Right February 18, 1965? CR V.111 p.3304 III 2004
Utah Apportionment of Legislature, II March 8, 1965? CR V.111 p.4320 III 2001
Maryland Apportionment of Legislature, II March 25, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 5820 (SJR 1) III
North Carolina Apportionment of Legislature, II May 17, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 10673 ("Resolution 60") III 1969-Not Joint
Minnesota Apportionment of Legislature, II May 17, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 10673 ("Resolution 5") III
Oklahoma Proportional Electoral College, I May 12, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 11488 (SCR 35) also found at Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 11802-11803 ("Enrolled Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 35") remainder of text p. 11803 III 2009
Louisiana Apportionment of Legislature, II June 1, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 12110 (SCR 25) III 1990
New Hampshire Apportionment of Legislature, II June 8, 1965? CR V.111 p.12853 III 2010
Illinois Revenue Sharing, Other June 9, 1965? CR V.111 p.14144 III
Florida Apportionment of Legislature, II June 22, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 14308 (HM 2433) III 2010
Mississippi Apportionment of Legislature, II July 7, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 15769 ("S. Con. Res. 101") III
Mississippi School Management, States' Right July 7, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 15769-15770 ("S. Con. Res. 102") remainder of text p. 15770 III
Mississippi Anti-Subversion July 7, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 15770 ("H. Con. Res. 14") III
Illinois Apportionment of Legislature, II
Apportionment of Legislature, Other		 June 22, 1965
March 13, 1967		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 19379 ("Senate Resolution No. 52" and unicameral--not likewise approved by Illinois House of Representatives)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 8004 (HJR 32)		 III 1969-Not Joint
III
Nebraska Proportional Electoral College, I August 10, 1965? CR V.111 p.19775 III
Nebraska Apportionment of Legislature, I September 22, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 24723 ("Legislative Resolution") III
Ohio Revenue Sharing, Other September 28, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, p. 25237 (SJR 16) III
Kentucky Apportionment of Legislature, II October 6, 1965? Cong. Rec. Vol. 111, pp. 26073-26074 ("Senate" Concurrent "Resolution 8") remainder of text p. 26074 III
Alabama Apportionment of Legislature, II January 14, 1966? Cong. Rec. Vol. 112, pp. 200-201 (SJR 3) remainder of text p. 201 III
New Mexico Apportionment of Legislature, II January 14, 1966? Cong. Rec. Vol. 112, p. 199 (SJR 2) III
Tennessee Apportionment of Legislature, II January 14, 1966? Cong. Rec. Vol. 112, p. 199-200 (HJR 34) remainder of text p. 200 III 2010
Illinois Apportionment of Legislature, Other March 13, 1967 Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 8004 (HJR 32) III
Indiana Apportionment of Legislature, II March 13, 1967? Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 6384 ("House Enrolled Concurrent Resolution No. 58") III
Alabama Revenue Sharing, Other April 19, 1967? Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, pp. 10117-10118 ("Resolution No. 11") remainder of text p. 10118 III
North Dakota Apportionment of Legislature, Other April 28, 1967? Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 11175 (HCR I-1) III 2001
Georgia Revenue Sharing, Other May 4, 1967? Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, pp. 11743-11744 ("Resolution 96") remainder of text p. 11744 III 2004
Texas Revenue Sharing, Other June 28, 1967? Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 17634 (SCR 12) III
Illinois Revenue Sharing, Other June 28, 1967? Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 17634-17635 (SJR 63) remainder of text p. 17635 III 1969-Not Joint
Iowa Apportionment of Legislature, Other May 13, 1969? Cong. Rec. Vol. 115, p. 12249 (SCR 13) III
Florida Revenue Sharing, Other September 3, 1969? Cong. Rec. Vol. 115, p. 24116 (SM 397) III 2010
New Hampshire Revenue Sharing, I December 1, 1969? Cong. Rec. Vol. 115, p. 36153-36154 ("Concurrent resolution..." remainder of text p. 36154 III 2010
Mississippi School Management, Other
School Management, No Assignment		 March 5, 1970?
March 15, 1973?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 113, p. 6097 (SCR 514)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 119, p. 8089 (HCR 55)		 III
IV
Louisiana Anti-Subversion June 22, 1970? Cong. Rec. Vol. 116, pp. 20672-20673 (HCR 4-A) remainder of text p. 20673 III 1990
Louisiana Income Tax, Limit Other July 7, 1970? Cong. Rec. Vol. 116, p. 22906 (SCR 25) III 1990
Louisiana Revenue Sharing, Other July 10, 1970? Cong. Rec. Vol. 116, p. 23765 (HCR 270) III 1990
New Jersey Revenue Sharing, I December 16, 1970? Cong. Rec. Vol. 116, p. 41879 (SCR 77) IV
West Virginia Revenue Sharing, I January 26, 1971? Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, pp. 541-542 (HCR 9) remainder of text p. 542 IV
Massachusetts Revenue Sharing, I March 4, 1971? Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, p. 5020 (Unnumbered resolution) IV
South Dakota Revenue Sharing, I March 8, 1971? Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, p. 5303 (HJR 503) IV
North Dakota Revenue Sharing, I April 26, 1971? Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, p. 11841 (SCR 4013) IV 2001
Louisiana Revenue Sharing, I June 15, 1971? Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, pp. 19801-19802 (SCR 138) remainder of text p. 19802 IV 1990
Ohio Revenue Sharing, I June 28, 1971? Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, p. 22280 ("Joint Resolution") IV
Delaware Revenue Sharing, I February 18, 1971? CR V.117 p.3175 ?? 2016
Oregon Revenue Sharing, I May 24, 1971? CR V.117 p.16574 ??
Massachusetts School Management, Other
School Management, Other		 September 8, 1971?
March 28, 1973?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 117, p. 30905 (Unnumbered resolution)
CR Vol. 119, pp. 12408-12409 (Unnumbered resolution) remainder of text p. 12409		 IV
IV
Michigan School Management, No Assignment November 16, 1971? CR V.117 pp.41598-41599 (SCR 172) Printed in "Extensions of Remarks" portion of Congressional Record remainder of text p. 41599 IV
Iowa Revenue Sharing, I March 2, 1972? Cong. Rec. Vol. 118, pp. 6501-6502 (HJR 1) remainder of text p. 6502 IV
Florida Senate Control of Presiding Officer April 4, 1972? Cong. Rec. Vol. 118, p. 11444 (SM 227) IV 2010
Arizona School Management, Prayer April 4, 1972? Cong. Rec. Vol. 118, p. 11445 (HCR 2009) III 2003
Tennessee School management, No Assignment May 8, 1972? CR V.118 p.16214 ?? 2010
New York School Management, Other October 2, 1972? Cong. Rec. Vol. 118, pp. 33047-33048 ("Joint Resolution No. 7) remainder of text p. 33048 IV
Virginia Balanced Federal Budget March 15, 1973?
March 10, 1975?
March 29, 1976?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 119, p. 8091 (HJR 75)
CR Vol. 121, p. 5793 (SJR 107)
CR Vol. 122, pp. 8335-8336 (SJR 36) remainder of text p. 8336		 IV
III
IV
Mississippi Prayer in Public Buildings March 20, 1973? Cong. Rec. Vol. 119, p. 8689 (HCR 14) IV
Virginia School management, No Assignment April 3, 1973? CR V.119 p.10675 ??
New Jersey School Management, Other April 9, 1973? CR V.119 p.11446 ??
Texas School Management, No Assignment April 10, 1973? Cong. Rec. Vol. 119, p. 11515 ("House Concurrent Resolution") IV
Oklahoma School Management, No Assignment April 25, 1973? Cong. Rec. Vol. 119, p. 14428 (HCR 1026) III 2009
Maryland School Management, Other May 7, 1973? CR V.119 p.14421 ??
Nevada School Management, No Assignment May 29, 1973? Cong. Rec. Vol. 119, pp. 17022-17023 (SJR 7) remainder of text p. 17023 IV
New Hampshire School Management, Other June 5, 1973? CR V.119 p.18190 ?? 2010
Arkansas Balanced Federal Budget March 10, 1975?
March 8, 1979?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, p. 5793 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution")
CR Vol. 125, p. 4372, POM-78 (HJR 1)		 III
IV
Mississippi Balanced Federal Budget April 29, 1975? Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, pp. 12175-12176 (HCR 51) remainder of text p. 12176 III
Missouri Right to Life, Various May 5, 1975? Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, p. 12867 (SCR 7) III
Nevada Limited Funding Mandates, Various June 26, 1975? Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, p. 21065 (AJR 47) III
Louisiana Balanced Federal Budget July 28, 1975?
February 8, 1979?
July 19, 1979?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, p. 25312 (SCR 109)
CR V.125 p.2110-1
Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, pp. 19470-19471, POM-394 (SCR 4) remainder of text p. 19471		 III 1990
IV 1990
V 1990
Kentucky School Management, No Assignment September 8, 1975? Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, p. 27821 ("House" Joint "Resolution No. 29") III
Alabama Balanced Federal Budget September 10, 1975? Cong. Rec. Vol. 121, p. 28347 (HJR 105) IV 1989
Georgia Balanced Federal Budget February 6, 1976? Cong. Rec. Vol. 122, p. 2740 (HR 469-1267) IV 2004
Delaware Balanced Federal Budget February 25, 1976? Cong. Rec. Vol. 122, p. 4329 (HCR 36) IV 2016
South Carolina Balanced Federal Budget February 25, 1976?
February 8, 1979?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 122, p. 4329 (Numerically Undesignated Resolution)
CR V.125 p.2114		 IV 2004
IV 2004
Massachusetts School Management, No Assignment April 7, 1976? Cong. Rec. Vol. 122, p. 9735, (Unnumbered resolution) III
Oklahoma Limited Funding Mandates, Various June 7, 1976? CR V.122 p.16814 III
Louisiana Right to Life, Various July 22, 1976? CR V.122 p.23550 IV 1990
Maryland Balanced Federal Budget January 28, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, pp. 2545-2546, POM-59 (SJR 4) remainder of text p. 2546 IV
Virginia Line Item Veto, Various March 28, 1977? CR V.123 p.9289 (1977 House Joint Resolution No. 168) ??
New Jersey Right to Life, Various April 5, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, p. 10481, POM-124 ("Senate No. 1271") IV
South Dakota Right to Life, Unborn
Right to Life, Sacred Life		 April 18, 1977?
April 18, 1980?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, p. 11048, POM-135 (HJR 503) IV 2010
Utah Right to Life, Various May 2, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, pp. 13057-13058, POM-151 (HJR 28) remainder of text p.13058 III 2001
Arkansas Right to Life, Various May 20, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, pp. 15808-15809, POM-189 (HJR 2) remainder of text p. 15809 IV
Rhode Island Right to Life, Various May 20, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, p. 15809, POM-190 ("Resolution") IV
Texas Balanced Federal Budget May 30, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, pp. 5223-5224, POM-95 (HCR 31) remainder of text p. 5224 IV
Arizona Balanced Federal Budget June 14, 1977? Cong. Rec. Vol. 123, pp. 18873-18874, POM-231 (HCM 2003) remainder of text p. 18874 III 2003
Massachusetts Right to Life, Various June 23, 1977? CR V.123 p.20659 ??
Indiana Right to Life, Various July 22, 1977? CR V.123 p.4797 ??
Colorado Balanced Federal Budget April 5, 1978? [file:///C:/Users/User1/Downloads/newpdf.pdf Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 8778, POM-579 (SJM 1)] V
Nebraska Right to Life, Various April 21, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 12694, POM-637 (Legislative Resolution No. 152) IV
Tennessee Judicial Term Limits April 25, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 11437, POM-612 (HJR 21) III 2010
Tennessee Balanced Federal Budget April 25, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, pp. 11437-11438, POM-613 (HJR 22) remainder of text p. 11438 III 2010
Pennsylvania Right to Life, Various April 25, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 11438, POM-614 (House Bill No. 71--described as a "Joint Resolution") IV
Oklahoma Balanced Federal Budget May 3, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 12397 (POM-629) (HJR 1049) IV 2009
Kansas Balanced Federal Budget May 19, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 14584, POM-657 (SCR 1661) IV
Delaware Right to Life, Various June 9, 1978? Cong. Rec. Vol. 124, p. 17055, POM-687 (HCR 9) III 2016
North Dakota Balanced Federal Budget February 8, 1979? CR V.125 p.2113 II 2001
North Carolina Balanced Federal Budget February 22, 1979? CR V.125 p.2113-4 ??
Mississippi Right to Life, Various February 26, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 3196, POM-49 (HCR 3) IV
Florida Balanced Federal Budget March 1, 1979?
June 21, 1988?		 Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 3655, POM-59 ("Senate Memorial" No. 234)
Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, pp. 3655-3656, POM-60 (HM 2801) remainder of text p. 3656
Cong. Rec. Vol. 134, p. 15363, POM-549 (SM 302)		 IV 1988
VI 2010
Idaho Balanced Federal Budget March 1, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 3657, POM-64 (HCR 7) V 1999
New Mexico Balanced Federal Budget March 1, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, pp. 3656-3657, POM-62 (SJR 1) remainder of text p. 3657 IV
South Dakota Balanced Federal Budget March 1, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 3656, POM-61 (SJR 1) V 2010
Nebraska Balanced Federal Budget March 7, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 4152, POM-67 (Legislative Resolution No. 106) IV
Georgia Right to Life, Various March 8, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 4372, POM-79 (House Resolution No. 254) IV 2004
Utah Balanced Federal Budget March 8, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, pp. 4372-4373, POM-80 (HJR 12) III 2001
Pennsylvania Balanced Federal Budget March 12, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 4627-4628, POM-85 (House Concurrent "Resolution No. 236") IV
Oregon Balanced Federal Budget March 22, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 5953, POM-104 (SJM 2) IV 2000
Indiana Balanced Federal Budget May 1, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 9188, POM-192 ("Senate Enrolled Joint Resolution No. 8") IV
New Hampshire Balanced Federal Budget May 16, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125 p. 11584, POM-223 (HCR 8) IV 2010
Iowa Balanced Federal Budget June 18, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 15227, POM-301 (SJR 1) IV
Nevada Right to Life, Various June 25, 1979? Cong. Rec. Vol. 125, p. 16350, POM-312 (SJR 27) V
Nevada Balanced Federal Budget January 29, 1980? Cong. Rec. Vol. 126, pp. 1104-1105, POM-535 (SJR 8) remainder of text p. 1105 III
V 1989-Not Joint
Idaho Right to Life, Various March 21, 1980? Cong. Rec. Vol. 126, p. 6172, POM-602 (SCR 132) V 1999
Oklahoma Right to Life, Various April 24, 1980? Cong. Rec. Vol. 126, p. 8972, POM-701 (HJR 1053) IV 2009
Tennessee Right to Life, Various May 2, 1980? Cong. Rec. Vol. 126, p. 9765, POM-712 (SJR 23) IV 2010
Alabama Right to Life, Various May 8, 1980? Cong. Rec. Vol. 126, p. 10650, POM-717 (SJR 9) IV
Arizona Limited Funding Mandates, Various May 15, 1980? Cong. Rec. Vol. 126, p. 11389, POM-730, (HCR 2001) III 2003
North Dakota Right to Life, Various April 27, 1981? CR V.127 p.10650 ??
Alaska Balanced Federal Budget February 3, 1982? CR V.128 p.798 ??
Missouri Balanced Federal Budget July 21, 1983? Cong. Rec. Vol. 129, p. 20352, POM-323 (SCR 3) V
Arizona Line Item Veto, Various June 5, 1984? Cong. Rec. Vol. 130, p. 15611, POM-684 (SCR 1008) III 2003
South Dakota Line Item Veto, Various March 12, 1986? Cong. Rec. Vol. 132, pp. 4473-4474, POM-599, ("A Joint Resolution") remainder of text p. 4474 V 2010
Utah Income Tax, Limit Other March 30, 1987? Cong. Rec. Vol. 133, p. 9736, POM-94 (SJR 8) III 2001
South Dakota Term Limits on Members of Congress April 4, 1989? Cong. Rec. Vol. 135, pp. 5395-5396, POM-42 (HJR 1001) remainder of text p. 5396 IV 2010
Idaho Income Tax, Limit Other April 10, 1989? CR V.135 p.5895 V 1999
Georgia Flag Desecration April 16, 1991? Cong. Rec. Vol. 137, pp. 8085-8086, POM-26 (House "Resolution No. 105") remainder of text p. 8086 IV 2004
Colorado Limited Funded Mandates, Various June 26, 1992? Cong. Rec. Vol. 138, p. 16552, POM-428 (SJM 92-3) V
South Dakota Limited Funded Mandates, Various March 22, 1993? Cong. Rec. Vol. 139, p. 5905, POM-50 (SJR 3) V 2010
Missouri No Judicial Taxing Power June 29, 1993? Cong. Rec. Vol. 139, p. 14565, POM-175 (SCR 9) V
Delaware Income Tax, Limit Other June 28, 1994? Cong. Rec. Vol. 140, p. 14718, POM-554 (HCR 56) IV 2016
Missouri Limited Funding Mandates, Various June 29, 1994? Cong. Rec. Vol. 140, pp. 15072-15073, POM-575 (SCR 21) remainder of text p. 15073 V
Arizona No Judicial Taxing Power March 27, 1996? Cong. Rec. Vol. 142, pp. S3012-S3013, POM-523 (SCR 1014) remainder of text p. S3013 III 2003
South Dakota No Judicial Taxing Power March 27, 1996? Cong. Rec. Vol. 142, p. S3013, POM-526 (HCR 1010) III
Nevada Term Limits on Members of Congress June 29, 1996? Nevada Constitution III
North Dakota No Judicial Taxing Power April 6, 2001? Cong. Rec. Vol. 147, pp. S3704-S3705, POM-7 ("House Concurrent Resolution No. 3031") remainder of text p. S3705 III
Louisiana Posse Comitatus April 29, 2008? Cong. Rec. Vol. 154, p. S3504, POM-329 ("House Concurrent Resolution No. 38") IV
Florida Balanced Federal Budget April 19, 2010 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, pp. S5563-S5564, POM-323 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution 10") remainder of text p. S5564 V
Nebraska Balanced Federal Budget (Reaffirmation of 1976 Legislative Resolution No. 106) April 13, 2010 Legislative Resolution No. 538 V
North Dakota Mode of Amendment, Other April 14, 2011 HCR 3048 V
North Dakota Increase in federal debt to require approval by majority of state legislatures April 11, 2011 Cong. Rec. Vol. 158, p. S1459, POM-66 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 4007") IV
Alabama Balanced Federal Budget June 1, 2011 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, pp. S3666-S3667, POM-251 ("Senate Joint Resolution No. 100") remainder of text p. S3667 V
Louisiana Increase in federal debt to require approval by majority of state legislatures June 21, 2011 Cong. Rec. Vol. 158, p. S2241, POM-69 ("House Concurrent Resolution No. 87") IV
New Hampshire Balanced Federal Budget May 16, 2012 Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, p. S5153, POM-197 ("House Concurrent Resolution 40") V
Ohio Balanced Federal Budget November 20, 2013 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S1174, POM-197 ((Senate) "Joint Resolution No. 5") V
Georgia Balanced Federal Budget February 20, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, pp. S3667-S3668, POM-254 ("Senate Resolution 371") remainder of text p. S3668 V
Georgia Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress March 6, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S4332, POM-285 ("Senate Resolution No. 736") V
Michigan Balanced Federal Budget March 26, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, p. S2098, POM-14 ("Enrolled Senate Joint Resolution V") V
Tennessee Balanced Federal Budget April 9, 2014 HJR 548 V
Alaska Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress April 19, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S6021, POM-345 ("House Joint Resolution 22", also referred to as "Legislative Resolve No. 68") V
Florida Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress April 21, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S4332, POM-286 ("Senate Memorial 476") V
Florida Balanced Federal Budget April 21, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S4333, POM-288 ("Senate Memorial 658") V
Florida Legislation in Congress to contain only one subject and that one subject must be clearly expressed in the measure's title April 23, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S4333, POM-289 ("House Memorial 261") V
Vermont Regulation of election campaign donations and expenditures; end legal concept of "corporate personhood"; overturn 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission May 2, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S4331, POM-284 ("Joint Senate Resolution No. 27") V
Louisiana Balanced Federal Budget May 15, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S5563, POM-322 ("House Concurrent Resolution No. 70") V
California Regulation of election campaign donations and expenditures; end legal concept of "corporate personhood"; overturn 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission June 23, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 160, p. S5507, POM-320 ("Assembly Joint Resolution No. 1") V
Illinois Regulation of election campaign donations and expenditures; end legal concept of "corporate personhood"; overturn 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission December 3, 2014 Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, p. S71, POM-126 ("Senate Joint Resolution No. 42") V
South Dakota Balanced Federal Budget February 17, 2015 Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, p. S6550, POM-255 ("House Joint Resolution No. 1001") V
New Jersey Regulation of election campaign donations and expenditures; end legal concept of "corporate personhood"; overturn 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission February 23, 2015 SCR 132 V
Utah Balanced Federal Budget March 6, 2015 HJR 7 V
North Dakota Balanced Federal Budget March 24, 2015 Cong. Rec. Vol. 161, pp. S2399-S2400, POM-17 ("House Concurrent Resolution 3015") remainder of text p. S2400 V
Alabama Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress May 21, 2015 Cong. Rec. Vol. 161 pp. S8601-S8602, POM-124 ("House Joint Resolution 112") remainder of text p. S8602 V
Tennessee Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress February 4, 2016 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, p. S6534, POM-117 ("Senate Joint Resolution No. 67") V
Florida Term limits on Members of Congress February 10, 2016 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, p. S112, POM-6 ("House Memorial 417") V
Indiana Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress February 29, 2016 Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, p. S6663, POM-256 ("Senate Enrolled Joint Resolution No. 14") V
West Virginia Balanced Federal Budget March 12, 2016 Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, p. S5277, POM-201 and POM-202 ("House Concurrent Resolution 36") V
Alaska Countermand Amendment April 16, 2016 Cong. Rec. Vol. 164, p. S703, POM-164 (HJR 14, also referred to as "Legislative Resolve No. 49") V
Oklahoma Combination of: (1) Balanced Federal Budget; and (2) Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress April 18, 2016 Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, pp. S6354-6355, POM-213 ("Senate Joint Resolution No. 4") remainder of text p. S6355 V
Louisiana Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress May 25, 2016 SCR 52 V
Rhode Island Regulation of election campaign donations and expenditures; end legal concept of "corporate personhood"; overturn 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Rhode Island lawmakers chose to approve two separate unicameral resolutions, rather than to adopt a single bicameral resolution. The validity of this approach is subject to question). June 16, 2016 (R.I. House version) and June 17, 2016 (R.I. Senate version) Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, p. S5276, POM-198 (R 326—H 7670) and Cong. Rec. Vol. 162, pp. S5276-S5277, POM-199 (R 327—S 2589) remainder of text p. S5277 V
Wyoming Balanced Federal Budget February 27, 2017 "House Enrolled Joint Resolution No. 2" V
Arizona Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress March 13, 2017 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, pp. S6534-S6535, POM-118 and POM-120 ("House Concurrent Resolution 2010") remainder of text p. S6535 V
North Dakota Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress March 24, 2017 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, p. S2527, POM-16 ("House Concurrent Resolution No. 3006") V
Arizona Balanced Federal Budget March 27, 2017 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, p. S6535, POM-119 and POM-121 ("House Concurrent Resolution 2013") V
Texas Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress May 10, 2017 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, p. S4056, POM-65 ("Senate Joint Resolution No. 2") V
Missouri Fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limiting the terms of office of federal officials, including members of Congress May 12, 2017 Cong. Rec. Vol. 163, pp. S3361-S3362, POM-40 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 4") V
Wisconsin Balanced Federal Budget November 7, 2017 Cong. Rec. Vol. 164, pp. S109-S110, POM-154 ("Assembly Joint Resolution No. 21") remainder of text p. S110 V
Alabama Term Limits on Members of Congress January 25, 2018 Cong. Rec. Vol. 164, pp. S3759-S3760, POM-243 ("House Joint Resolution No. 23") V
Missouri Term Limits on Members of Congress May 17, 2018 Cong. Rec. Vol. 164, p. S5422, POM-278 ("Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 40") V

Counts by states

Maintaining custody of the state legislatures' applications

If one considers that applying for a convention is a constitutional power of the several states, should the states have the burden of managing the counting of applications? This viewpoint reduces the role of Congress to collecting applications and verifying claims by states that the applications included by the states allow the convention being applied for. If that claim is correct, Congress must call a convention as specified by that claim. Another point of view holds that Congress must maintain custody, and keep an up-to-date tally, of the state legislatures' applications. In 2014, Idaho lawmakers approved House Joint Memorial No. 104 (designated as "POM-231" and published in the Senate's portion of the Congressional Record of May 15, 2014) admonishing Congress to do a better job of keeping track of such applications. On January 6, 2015, the U.S. House of Representatives amended its parliamentary rules (House Resolution No. 5 by Representative Kevin McCarthy) so as to instruct the House's Committee on the Judiciary to undertake a compilation of past Article V Convention applications; as a result, the website of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives has already begun to make the full texts of some of the prior applications available to Internet users.

2013 Ohio application; 2014 Georgia, Michigan, Tennessee, Florida, and Louisiana applications; and 2015 North Dakota application

The balanced budget application of Ohio in 2013 as well as those of Georgia, Michigan, Tennessee, and Louisiana in 2014, and that of North Dakota in 2015, include a list of previous state applications that the new application should be counted with.

Some resolutions include Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Georgia and Ohio also include Delaware, and Ohio adds New Hampshire. Louisiana's mentions Ohio, Georgia, and Tennessee, but completely neglects Michigan. None of the applications include itself in the list. Florida in 2014 re-affirmed its 2010 re-application (after its 1988 rescission of that state's 1976 House Memorial No. 2801 and Senate Memorial No. 234). The 2015 North Dakota application does not list other states which have previously applied.

The Michigan 2014 application thus represents 18 states, the 2014 Georgia application thus represents 19 states and the 2013 Ohio application and 2014 Tennessee application represent 20 states. Louisiana's 2014 application contains 22 (excluding itself). All would be short of the 34 states required to mandate an article V convention.

Accuracy of the counts

Applications for all of the states listed on the subject of a Balanced Budget Amendment can be found in the table above, including a 2012 application by New Hampshire and a 1976 application by Delaware. Thus it seems likely that if another state follows this precedent it could include 23 states, plus itself, for a total of 23 states. There is disagreement among scholars as to whether a state that has approved an application may later rescind that application. If it is ultimately adjudicated that a state may not rescind a prior application, then Ohio's 2013 application for a Balanced Budget Amendment convention would be the 33rd (out of the necessary 34) and Michigan's 2014 application would be the 34th on that topic—rather than merely the 20th and 22nd, respectively. The Balanced Budget Amendment applications by Ohio and Michigan plowed completely new ground for those two states. Whereas, the renewed applications from Alabama, Florida (both 2010 and 2014), Georgia, New Hampshire, and Tennessee, simply re-visited old and already-familiar territory. Those five states applied during the 1970s and then rescinded in the period from 1988 to 2010. Then, they changed their minds yet again and re-applied from 2010 to 2014 for a Balanced Budget Amendment convention. Again, if states may not rescind, then with Michigan's actions of March 26, 2014, the threshold of 34 that Article V requires for triggering a convention on the subject of a Balanced Budget Amendment has now been met.

Wisconsin 1929

In 1929 Wisconsin applied to Congress to perform their constitutional duty to call a convention, listing Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin as states having made an application for a convention. There were 48 states in 1929, so 32 applications would be required to call a convention. 35 states were named.

Accuracy of record

Links to the text of applications by all states except California and North Carolina are provided in the table above. A reference to an application by California has been found in the congressional record and the text of an application by South Carolina is given in the table above.

It should be noted that the table here is not guaranteed to be a complete record, and that records for additional applications known in 1929 may have been lost.

Verifiable Applications

Three states, Missouri, Texas, and Wisconsin, had applied for a general convention. Eleven states listed had applied for a convention to prohibit polygamy (Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Vermont, and Washington), plus South Carolina. Idaho had included the direct election of the President and Vice President with their request for direct election of Senators. Thus 16 states clearly had outstanding applications.

Strong Applications

Alabama and Georgia had outstanding issues from 1832 and 1833, making a less certain 18. Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Nevada, and Oklahoma would be added if we include class II requests for Direct Elections of Senators, for a total of 25.

Weak Applications

The only known records for an application New York and Virginia are their ratification documents, before the Bill of Rights. New Jersey and Kentucky applied for a convention to prevent the Civil War, and class III applications for the Direct Election of Senators. Arkansas, Maine, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Utah only had documented class III applications for the Direct Election of Senators. These nine states have questionable merit for inclusion.

California is most likely in this group.

Unknown Applications

The status of North Carolina can not be known without the text of the applications, if this is not a misrepresentation of South Carolina.

Petitions to Congress

The Senate referred the memorial to the Committee on the Judiciary.

The Clerk of House, Karen Haas sent the request to the Speaker of the House, John Boehner's office. On October 24, 2013, the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, presented it to the Judiciary Committee for review. The action was entered in the Congressional Record:

PETITIONS, ETC. Under clause 3 of rule XII, 55. The SPEAKER presented a petition of Dan Marks, Hilo, HI, relative to a letter regarding methods for proposing amendments; which was referred to the committee on the Judiciary.

Elizabeth MacDonough the Senate Parliamentarian in July 2013, entered the request in the Congressional Record on August 1, 2013 and sent the request on to the Judiciary Committee. That entry reads:

[Page: S6204] POM-120. A communication from citizens of the State of Hawaii petitioning for verification and tabulation of State applications for an Article V Convention; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Rogers style application counts

James Kenneth Rogers holds that applications are required to list an issue, and must be tallied accordingly.[7] Thus, this section contains counts of applications on specific issues. One obvious question is how close do the applications need to be.

Three broad categories are presented, with tabulations for narrower categories tabulated and a count of amendments following specific wordings.

Federal Budgeting

The many applications for a balanced budget, limitations on income tax and revenue sharing warrant a counting of these issues and particularly popular wordings of them. Since many of the income tax and revenue sharing applications recommend a repeal of Amendment XVI, this also deserved a separate count.

Balanced Budget

Currently, 27 states (Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming) have outstanding applications for an amendment to establish a balanced budget. Eight more states have rescinded their application (Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, Idaho, Oregon, South Carolina, and Virginia). With the 2014 application by Michigan, the total of active plus rescinded applications equaled the 34 required to mandate a convention. Then, in 2016, West Virginia (like Ohio in 2013 and Michigan in 2014) made a first-time application for a Convention on the topic of a Balanced Budget Amendment. Likewise, in 2016, Delaware rescinded its 1976 application for a Convention on that subject.

Two particular wordings of applications have been submitted by over six states.

The wording labeled Balanced Budget, Emergency in the above table have outstanding applications from thirteen states (Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, and Virginia). Arizona, Idaho, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming have rescinded their applications with this particular wording.

The wording labeled Balanced Budget, General in the above table has outstanding applications from six states (Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Missouri, and New Hampshire.) Florida, Louisiana, and Oregon have rescinded applications with this particular wording.

Other wordings, without enough states to warrant a separate categorization, have been made by eleven states (Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.) Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, and North Dakota have rescinded their applications with rare wordings.

Applications by Louisiana and North Dakota in 2011 to require approval by a majority of the state legislatures to authorize any increases in the national debt limit can be viewed as a different type of balanced budget amendment but with a similar goal.

Limited Income Tax

Fifteen states (Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin) have outstanding applications for an amendment to limit income taxes. Thirteen more states have rescinded their applications (Florida, Hawaii, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming). Two particular wordings of applications have been submitted by over six states.

The wording labeled Income Tax, Limited I has outstanding applications from seven states (Alabama, Delaware, Kansas, Michigan, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin). Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Utah have rescinded applications with this wording.

The wording labeled Income Tax, Limited II has outstanding applications from six states (Arkansas, Iowa, Indiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania). Illinois and Wyoming have rescinded there applications with this wording.

Other, less popular, wordings are outstanding for three states (Colorado, Delaware, and Virginia). Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Utah have rescinded variant wordings on this topic. The applications listed here for Virginia and Hawaii don't actually request that a convention to be called to produce this amendment.

Revenue Sharing

Fourteen states (Alabama, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, and West Virginia) have outstanding applications for an amendment establishing federal-state revenue sharing. Seven more states have rescinded their applications (Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, and North Dakota). Two particular wordings of applications have been submitted by over six states.

The wording labeled Revenue Sharing, I has outstanding applications from eight states (Delaware, Iowa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, and West Virginia). Louisiana, Massachusetts, and North Dakota have rescinded their applications with this wording.

The wording labeled Revenue Sharing, II has outstanding applications from five states (Iowa, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, and New Mexico). Nebraska has rescinded their application with this wording.

Other, less popular, wordings are outstanding for four states (Alabama, Illinois, Ohio, and Texas). Florida, Georgia, Illinois, and Louisiana have rescinded variant wordings on this topic.

Amendment XVI

Income Tax, Limit I and II and Revenue Sharing II specifically call for the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which gave Congress the power to lay income taxes without regards to states' populations. Fifteen states have expressly called for the repeal of Amendment XVI (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Wisconsin). Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Utah have rescinded their calls to repeal Amendment XVI.

All of these proposals, plus another labeled Taxation on Government Securities, call for a change to the federal income tax. 24 states have applied for an amendment to change the income tax structure (Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Mains, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin). Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming have rescinded their applications to change the income tax structure.

Federal Structure and Operation

Several amendments have been proposed to alter the political structure of the United States government. Two of the most relevant are the Direct Election of Senators and Apportionment of State Legislatures. Alterations to the methods of amending the constitution and requests for a proportional electoral college have also garnered respectable support among state legislatures.

Direct Election of Senators

21 states (Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin) have outstanding applications for an amendment establishing the election of Senators by popular vote. Seven more states have since rescinded their applications (Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming). Two particular wordings received significant support, identified by Roman numerals.

These applications contributed to the proposal by congress of Amendment XVII, with the 28 states above being four states short of enough to have forced a convention in 1911 and pressure building. All of the rescissions have been since 2000, as a part of a movement to prevent the calling of a convention.

The first wording has outstanding applications from eleven states (California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin). Oregon and Utah have rescinded applications with this wording.

The second wording has outstanding applications from five states (Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee). Montana has rescinded their application with this wording.

Other wordings are outstanding for nine states (Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Washington). Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Wyoming have rescinded applications with spurious wordings.

Apportionment of Legislature

Twenty states (Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming) have outstanding applications for an amendment establishing the right of a state to determine state legislature districts by a non proportional method. Eleven more states have since rescinded their applications (Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Utah). Two particular wordings have been popular, indicated by Roman numerals.

The first wording has outstanding applications from ten states (Arkansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming). Idaho, Kansas, and Montana have rescinded applications with this wording.

The second wording has outstanding applications from sixteen states (Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia). Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Utah have rescinded their application with this wording.

Other wordings are outstanding for Illinois and Iowa.

Mode of Amendment

Ten states (Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin) have outstanding applications for an amendment to alter the process of amending the constitution of the United States. Seven more states have rescinded their applications (Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wyoming).

The wording labeled Mode of Amendment, Identical Text in the above table has outstanding applications from 6 states (Arkansas, Illinois, Missouri, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia). Florida, Kansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wyoming have rescinded applications with this wording.

Proportional Electoral College

On December 7, 2015, Lawrence Lessig argued in favor of invocation of an Article V convention with the objective of altering the operation of the Electoral College.[8]

Political Campaign Finance Reform

Five states (Vermont, California, New Jersey, Illinois, Rhode Island) have thus far[9] made applications for an amendment to overturn the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in order to more tightly regulate political contributions from corporations.

Social Issues

Paulsen style application counts

Michael Stokes Paulsen holds that the applications for a convention alone should govern the convention.[10] Thus, this section contains counts of applications based on groupings not excluded by the applications themselves.

Counts including class IV, V, or VI applications would become Rogers style due to the limitations clearly expressed in these applications, and are not included below.

Class I and II Applications

Indiana, Missouri, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin have outstanding applications for a convention to propose amendments, with no accompanying issue.

Alabama has a request for a convention limiting tariffs, and South Carolina one for clarification on Amendment X, each implying that other amendments may be considered.

Class I, II, and III Applications

24 more states have outstanding class III applications. These are Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.

This gives a total of 31 states with known outstanding class I, II, or III applications. Three more application would meet the 2/3 requirement to call a convention.

Brennan style application counts

Thomas E. Brennan holds that, in 1982, it was necessary, desirable, and feasible to hold a convention.[11] He lists the following counts in the introduction to his claim:

  • 450 applications through 1980, plus 25 more since 1980, gives 475 total applications
  • Applications from every state in the union (Hawaii's expired and did not call for a convention, 8 states have rescinded all applications, leaving 41.)
  • 36 states with more than six or more separate applications (Ten of those have since rescinded all or most of their applications, and five are not identified in the table above, but several states have five applications listed here.)

See also

References

  1. ↑ http://www.foavc.org/reference/file59.pdf
  2. ↑ http://www.foavc.org/reference/1930.pdf
  3. ↑ http://www.foavc.org/StateApplications/Numeric.htm
  4. ↑ http://www.foavc.org/StateApplications/Amendment_Subject.htm
  5. ↑ http://www.foavc.org/reference/file85.pdf
  6. ↑ Judge Bruce Van Sickle and attorney Lynn Boughey M. (Fall 1990). "A Lawful and Peaceful Revolution: Article V and Congress' Present Duty to Call a Convention for Proposing Amendments". Hamline Law Review, Volume 14, p. 1.
  7. ↑ Rogers, James The Other Way to Amend the Constitution: The Article V Constitutional Convention Amendment Process. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 30: 1005.
  8. ↑ "Should states call a convention to amend the Constitution? Lessig debates". Harvard Law Today. December 7, 2015. Retrieved 6 October 2017.
  9. ↑ http://www.wolf-pac.com
  10. ↑ Paulson, Michael "A General Theory of Article V: The Constitutional Lessons of the Twenty-Seventh Amendment". Yale Law Journal 103: 677.
  11. ↑ Brennan, Thomas E., "Return to Philadelphia: A Case for Calling of an Amendatory Convention Under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution,'"1 Cooley Law Review 1 (1982).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.