POL201

Resources for Week One Discussion – Amending the U.S. Constitution

Before participating in this week’s discussion “Amending the U.S. Constitution,” review these resources:

1. Read this article:

a. U.S. Constitution, Article V.

Philadelphia Convention. (1788, June 21). Article V. In Constitution of the United States. Retrieved from

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

(Article V describes the complex process for amending the Constitution.)

2. Watch this video:

a. How to amend the U.S. Constitution

Howcast. (2012, August). How to amend the U.S. Constitution [Video]. Available from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTX9YsMywks

(This short video describes the amendment process. Captions are available by clicking the “CC” icon in

the video screen.)

3. Read two of these articles found in the Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database in the Ashford Online

Library:

a. Reintroduce yourself to the Constitution.

Huey-Burns, C. (2010, December). 32. Reintroduce yourself to the Constitution. U.S. News & World

Report, 147(11), 60-61.

(This brief article discusses how citizens can learn about contemporary constitutional issues.)

b. The system’s not to blame.

Meacham, J. (2010, February 22). The system’s not to blame. We are. Newsweek, 155(8), 2.

(This brief article notes that constitutional change is slow by design and points to Congress’ power to

convene a constitutional convention.)

c. Keeping the Constitution up to date.

Miners, Z. (2010, May 28). Keeping the Constitution up to date. U.S. News Digital Weekly, 2(21), 14.

(In this brief interview, a law professor argues that the Constitution evolves with economic and

technological change.)

d. What constitutionalism means.

Ponnuru, R. (2011, September 9). What constitutionalism means. National Review, 63(17), 20-22.

(This brief article argues that liberals want to change the Constitution through judicial interpretation while

conservatives want to change it by amendment.)

e. The G.O.P. targets the Constitution.

Schlesinger, R. (2010, September 3). The G.O.P. targets the Constitution. U.S. News Digital Weekly,

2(25), 12.

(This brief article discusses how some Tea Party Republicans want to change the Constitution radically

through amendments.)

f. Becoming the framers.

Zalan, K. (2011, September 2). Becoming the framers. U.S. News Digital Weekly, 3(35), 18.

(This brief article discusses Thomas Jefferson’s advice to revise the Constitution often. It also criticizes

Congress for blocking amendments.)

4. Select one of these proposed constitutional amendments and review some of the resources assigned for it:

The Balanced Budget Amendment proposes to amend the Constitution to require the national government to

operate without annual deficits (i.e., government expenditures could not exceed revenues).

a. The answer is a balanced budget amendment.

Calabresi, S. (2011, October). The answer is a balanced budget amendment. American Spectator, 44(8),

16-18. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This brief article argues that a balanced budget amendment is necessary to keep the nation out of

bankruptcy.)

b. Balanced-budget blues.

Foroohar, R. (2011, August 8). Balanced-budget blues. Time, 178(5), 24. Retrieved from Academic

Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This brief article argues that a balanced-budget amendment is not feasible economically.)

c. Does the U.S. need a balanced budget amendment? (“pro”)

Hatch, O. (2011, April 25). Balanced budget amendment needed to fix national debt crisis. U.S. News.

Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/04/25/balanced-budget-amendment-

needed-to-fix-national-debt-crisis.

(This brief article argues in favor of a balanced budget amendment to force government to deal effectively

with a growing national debt.)

d. Does the U.S. need a balanced budget amendment? (“con”)

Lilly, S. (2011, April 22). A balanced budget amendment would be a dangerous distraction. U.S. News.

Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/04/25/a-balanced-budget-amendment-

would-be-a-dangerous-distraction.

(This brief article argues against a balanced budget amendment because government must consider

factors other than fiscal policy.)

The Birthright Citizenship Amendment proposes to amend the 14th Amendment of the Constitution to restrict the

right of U.S. citizenship that automatically comes with being born in the U.S.

a. Amending the amendment.

(2010, August 21). Amending the amendment. Economist, 396(8696), 24. Retrieved from ProQuest

(Search All) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This brief article discusses proposals to change the 14th Amendment’s grant of "birthright citizenship."

They object to children of illegal aliens gaining citizenship by birth.)

b. Should the children of illegal aliens be U.S. citizens?

Fitz, M. (2010, August 30). Repealing the 14th amendment would not fix our immigration system. U.S.

News. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/08/30/repealing-the-14th-

amendment-would-not-fix-our-immigration-system

(This brief article argues against denying citizenship to children of illegal aliens, commenting on the risks

of changing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.)

c. Should the children of illegal aliens be U.S. citizens?

Spalding, M. (2010, August 30). 14th amendment doesn't make illegal aliens' children citizens. U.S.

News. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/08/30/14th-amendment-doesnt-

make-illegal-aliens-children-citizens.

(This brief article favors withholding citizenship from the children of illegal aliens, arguing that Congress

already has this power without a constitutional amendment.)

The Equal Rights Amendment (“ERA”) proposes to amend the Constitution to prohibit government from

discriminating against persons on the basis of gender.

a. Who opposed the ERA? An analysis of the social bases of antifeminism.

Burris, V. (1983, June). Who opposed the ERA? An analysis of the social bases of antifeminism. Social

Science Quarterly (University of Texas Press), 64(2), 305-317. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier

(EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This academic article examines 1980 election data to explain the defeat of the ERA in the 1970s.)

b. H.J. resolution and the ERA.

Cahill, B. (2011, October/September). H.J. resolution and the ERA. Humanist, 71(5), 11. Retrieved from

Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This brief article discusses recent efforts in Congress to renew the effort to ratify the ERA.)

c. The rise and fall of the Equal Rights Amendment.

Noble, G. (2012, March). The rise and fall of the Equal Rights Amendment. History Review, 72, 30-33.

Retrieved from Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This short article reviews the history of the ERA, from its inception in 1923 to its failure to be ratified by

enough states in 1982.)

d. 'Equal rights' for women: wrong then, wrong now.

Schlafly, P. (2007, April 8). 'Equal rights' for women: wrong then, wrong now. Los Angeles Times.

Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-schafly8apr08,0,915647.story

(In this brief article, a vocal ERA opponent argues that when Americans see the “cynicism” of a revived

ERA proposal, they'll reject it, just as they did before.)

e. Who needs an Equal Rights Amendment? You do!

(n.d.). Who needs an Equal Rights Amendment? You do! Retrieved from

http://www.now.org/issues/economic/cea/who.html

(This brief article by one of the ERA’s most vocal organizational backers argues for the ERA’s economic

and social benefits.)

The Overturn Citizens United Amendment proposes to amend the Constitution to overturn a Supreme Court

decision (Citizens United v. FEC) that extends to corporations the same First Amendment free speech rights as

those held by natural persons to contribute unlimited money to political campaigns.

a. Debating Citizens United.

Abrams, F., & Neuborne, B. (2011, January 31). Debating Citizens United. Nation, 292(5), 19-23.

Retrieved from Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This short article presents views on the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United. One argues that it

is consistent with the First Amendment; one claims that it misinterprets the First Amendment.)

b. Citizens unite against Citizens United.

Berman, A. (2010, August 16). Citizens unite against Citizens United. Nation, 291(7/8), 29-30. Retrieved

from Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This brief article discusses efforts to pass a constitutional amendment that overturns Citizens United.)

c. Move to Amend.

Move to Amend. (n d.). Other amendments. Retrieved from http://movetoamend.org/other-amendments

(This webpage lists several proposed amendments that would overturn Citizens United.)

d. Corporations aren't persons.

Rothschild, M. (2010, April). Corporations aren't persons. Amend the Constitution. Progressive, 74(4),

16-20. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This short article critiques Justice Kennedy’s opinion in the in the Citizens United case.)

e. Corpus ex machina.

Williams, P. J. (2010, February 15). Corpus ex machina. Nation, 290(6), 9. Retrieved from Academic

Search Premier (EBSCOhost) database, in the Ashford Online Library.

(This brief article discusses the history of the idea that corporations should be treated as though they were

natural persons with rights under the Constitution.)