Maria
Evaluate the extent to which the US Constitution is outdated (30)
There are arguments for and against the US Constitution being outdated. An example of this is
that it could be argued that the amendment process is too difficult, whereas others would argue
that a certain degree of ‘gridlock’ is necessary to ensure that an unfavourable policy isn't rushed
through. Also, federalism can cause conflict between federal and state governments, however it
can be argued that it creates checks and balances within the national government and protects
individual rights. As the Constitution is so vague, this gives the substantial power of judicial
review to the unelected judges of the Supreme Court, arguably creating an ‘imperial judiciary’,
however this makes the Constitution flexible to make necessary changes occur. Overall, the US
Constitution is predominantly outdated as although it has lasted over 200 years, it is too hard to
amend, it gives unelected judges too much power through judicial review, and federalism is hard
to follow in events like a natural disaster where the national government have to intervene,
going against federalism and therefore going against the constitution.
The most significant argument to suggest that the US Constitution is outdated is that the
Constitution is too difficult to amend. It requires approval from ⅔ of Congress. Clearing this
super-majority is a considerable achievement; since the Constitution was written over 5,000
amendments have been proposed yet only 27 have become amendments. One proposal which
failed at this first stage was the Federal Marriage Amendment, preventing same-sex marriage.
Another amendment which failed at this stage was the Flag Desecration Amendment 2006,
which fell short of just one vote with 66-34. The next stage requires ¾ of the States to ratify the
amendment. Some amendments, such as the Equal Rights Amendment of 1972, guaranteeing
equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex, did not gain the 38 states’
agreement- it only received ratification from 35 states, therefore it did not become an
amendment. This suggests that the amending of the Constitution is a process which is too long
and difficult as it requires such widespread and vocal support. The voice of small population
states are over-represented which makes it possible the thwarting of the will of the majority by a
small and possibly unrepresentative minority of states, and the difficulty of formal amendment
enhances the power of the (unelected) Supreme Court to make interpretative amendments. It
thereby perpetuates what some see as outdated provisions: for example, the Electoral College
which can mean the winner of the popular vote is denied presidency, as well as the survival of
the arguably archaic 2nd amendment, which gives people the right to “keep and bear arms”.
However, the 18th Amendment was still rapidly passed through- the Prohibition amendment
(1918)- which prohibited alcohol. It was a disaster which was repealed within only 14 years,
which may show that the requirements of the process are not demanding enough. The
Constitution was given such a ‘demanding’ formal amendment process to protect the American
people from the tyranny of government, but perhaps the speed in which the 18th amendment
was introduced shows that the government was still tyrannical, as well as the failure of the
Equal Rights Amendment. On the other hand, the process is deliberately designed to be
difficult, but not impossible. Super-majorities ensure against a small majority being able to
impose its will onto the majority, and the lengthy process makes it less likely that the
Constitution will be amended on a temporary issue. It also guarantees that both the federal and
state governments favour a proposal, and it gives more representation to the small population
states through the Senate’s role and the requirement for agreement of ¾ of state legislatures.
The vagueness of the Constitution also allows for interpretation which can mean it evolves over
time. Overall, although the amendment process ensures against a small majority imposing its
will onto the majority, it is too difficult and the need for a super-majority can mean that small
population states are over represented- this is shown by how only 27 amendments have been
passed in over 200 years of the Constitution’s existence, and attempts to protect human rights
such as the Equal Rights Amendment could not be passed.
Evaluate the extent to which the US Constitution is outdated (30)
There are arguments for and against the US Constitution being outdated. An example of this is
that it could be argued that the amendment process is too difficult, whereas others would argue
that a certain degree of ‘gridlock’ is necessary to ensure that an unfavourable policy isn't rushed
through. Also, federalism can cause conflict between federal and state governments, however it
can be argued that it creates checks and balances within the national government and protects
individual rights. As the Constitution is so vague, this gives the substantial power of judicial
review to the unelected judges of the Supreme Court, arguably creating an ‘imperial judiciary’,
however this makes the Constitution flexible to make necessary changes occur. Overall, the US
Constitution is predominantly outdated as although it has lasted over 200 years, it is too hard to
amend, it gives unelected judges too much power through judicial review, and federalism is hard
to follow in events like a natural disaster where the national government have to intervene,
going against federalism and therefore going against the constitution.
The most significant argument to suggest that the US Constitution is outdated is that the
Constitution is too difficult to amend. It requires approval from ⅔ of Congress. Clearing this
super-majority is a considerable achievement; since the Constitution was written over 5,000
amendments have been proposed yet only 27 have become amendments. One proposal which
failed at this first stage was the Federal Marriage Amendment, preventing same-sex marriage.
Another amendment which failed at this stage was the Flag Desecration Amendment 2006,
which fell short of just one vote with 66-34. The next stage requires ¾ of the States to ratify the
amendment. Some amendments, such as the Equal Rights Amendment of 1972, guaranteeing
equal legal rights for all American citizens regardless of sex, did not gain the 38 states’
agreement- it only received ratification from 35 states, therefore it did not become an
amendment. This suggests that the amending of the Constitution is a process which is too long
and difficult as it requires such widespread and vocal support. The voice of small population
states are over-represented which makes it possible the thwarting of the will of the majority by a
small and possibly unrepresentative minority of states, and the difficulty of formal amendment
enhances the power of the (unelected) Supreme Court to make interpretative amendments. It
thereby perpetuates what some see as outdated provisions: for example, the Electoral College
which can mean the winner of the popular vote is denied presidency, as well as the survival of
the arguably archaic 2nd amendment, which gives people the right to “keep and bear arms”.
However, the 18th Amendment was still rapidly passed through- the Prohibition amendment
(1918)- which prohibited alcohol. It was a disaster which was repealed within only 14 years,
which may show that the requirements of the process are not demanding enough. The
Constitution was given such a ‘demanding’ formal amendment process to protect the American
people from the tyranny of government, but perhaps the speed in which the 18th amendment
was introduced shows that the government was still tyrannical, as well as the failure of the
Equal Rights Amendment. On the other hand, the process is deliberately designed to be
difficult, but not impossible. Super-majorities ensure against a small majority being able to
impose its will onto the majority, and the lengthy process makes it less likely that the
Constitution will be amended on a temporary issue. It also guarantees that both the federal and
state governments favour a proposal, and it gives more representation to the small population
states through the Senate’s role and the requirement for agreement of ¾ of state legislatures.
The vagueness of the Constitution also allows for interpretation which can mean it evolves over
time. Overall, although the amendment process ensures against a small majority imposing its
will onto the majority, it is too difficult and the need for a super-majority can mean that small
population states are over represented- this is shown by how only 27 amendments have been
passed in over 200 years of the Constitution’s existence, and attempts to protect human rights
such as the Equal Rights Amendment could not be passed.
