Maine Senate Kills “Article V” Convention Bid

The Maine Senate has officially defeated a resolution calling for a national convention under Article V to consider proposing amendments to impose term limits on members of Congress and address issues related to campaign finance.

SP 705 — Joint Resolution Making Separate Applications to the Congress of the United States Calling Constitutional Conventions to Consider Representational Integrity and Propose Amendments Establishing Term Limits for Congress and Addressing Campaign Finance Reform — was initially introduced during the state’s first legislative session and then carried over into this year.

After the Veterans and Legal Affairs (VLA) Committee split over the resolution in January, the Senate adopted the Committee’s minority “Ought Not to Pass” report on Tuesday.

[RELATED: Maine Lawmakers Consider Calling for Article V Convention to Propose Congressional Term Limits, Campaign Finance Amendments]

Before supporting the “Ought Not to Pass” report, the Senate rejected the VLA Committee’s majority “Ought to Pass” report with a roll call vote of 12-18.

With the Senate’s acceptance of the Committee’s minority “Ought Not to Pass” report, the resolution has been placed in the legislative files, meaning that it will not be considered any further by lawmakers.

Similar to how the VLA Committee’s vote panned out, support and opposition to the measure was not neatly divided along partisan lines in the Senate. Although most Republicans supported the resolution and most Democrats opposed it, there were several instances of cross-over, both in the Committee and in the Senate.

Under Article V of the United States Constitution — upon request from the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the states — a convention must be called for the purpose of proposing amendments to the constitution, and SP 705 would have served as an application for a convention under this framework.

In order for a convention of this sort to be called, thirty-four state legislatures must pass applications requesting that one be convened.

Although SP 705 proposed two specific amendments for consideration, there was some disagreement over whether or not a convention called as a result of Maine’s application could effectively be constrained to a pre-approved agenda.

Supporters of this resolution emphasized the targeted nature of the proposed amendments, arguing the merits of amending the Constitution to include Congressional term limits and campaign finance reforms.

Opponents, on the other hand, raised concerns about the destabilizing potential of opening the door for sweeping constitutional changes.

Among constitutional scholarship, there is some disagreement as to if and how an Article V convention could be restrained in its purpose, as the Constitution is largely silent on the specifics of what such an occurrence would look like in practice.

According to Convention of States — an organization that advocates in favor of legislation such as SP 705 — nineteen states have passed applications an Article V convention beginning with Georgia in 2014.