A. Barton Hinkle: The Case Against Convening a New Constitutional Convention

Arguments about process are usually, at bottom, arguments about policy. That explains why many Republicans, Democrats, and The New York Times change their opinion about Senate filibusters as frequently as control of the Senate changes hands: Giving more power to the minority party is a virtue only if you're in it. It also explains why enthusiasm for changing the Constitution waxes and wanes according to the issue being debated.
These days, writes A. Barton Hinkle, it is critics of big government who are interested in convening a new constitutional convention. They want to revise the document and place strict new limits on government overreach. But Hinkle urges caution. The U.S. Constitution may not be perfect, he grants, but its replacement will probably turn out to be much worse.
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?