Is Article V the Worst of the Constitutions Stupidities?
But this latter point brings me to what is, in some way, though, the most egregious feature of the Constitution, Article V. This aspect of the Constitution alone justifies a decision to withhold one’s signature, at least in 2003. As a legal matter, Article V makes it next-to-impossible to amend the Constitution – which is itself a mistake. There has been no significant amendment of the Constitution since the Progressive Era, unless one counts the 22nd Amendment and its two-term rule, which almost certainly is the explanation for Bill Clinton’s not running for re-election as President in 2000. And as a practical matter, Article V tends to discourage any serious discussion of the Constitution’s adequacy – precisely because it makes it appear that, if it is indeed inadequate, then there is nothing we can do about that. Our Constitution has become truly Sartrean: Apparently, there’s no exit. So why should I, or anyone else, sign such a document? The answer is: We should not. To be a good c
