1912 Constitutional Convention

This is a POD that never gets discussed: In the early 20th Century, a Constitutional Convention was almost called.

The 17th Amendment, calling for the direct election of senators, kept getting vetoed by the Senate. :p To get around this, several states started calling for a Constitutional Convention to get around Congress all together. It was that threat of a convention that made the Senate vote in favor the the amendment. They were afraid of what the convention would create.

What happens if the Senate refuses and the convention is called? Would 1912 politicians alter the Constitution in other ways?
 
Constitutional Conventions are not as simple as amending the constitution; it would mean a wholesale reworking of the United States. The effect of this would probably mean having the Senate fold before anything is actually changed in the constitution.

Once the convention begins, however, it probably comes to a sputtering halt. OK, the Senate is terrible, but we have an unparalleled opportunity to do things like get rid of the 14th amendments due process clause and ensure Jim Crow is legal forever. Alcohol could be banned while also reducing protections under unreasonable searches and seizures.

The Convention might draw up a draft constitution, which goes nowhere. A lot of people will call it a vanity project, but the more intelligent will recognize that a prescedent has been set, and that if the USA were found to be incalculably wrong, a general overhaul could be in the works.

And now consider two decades later, where FDR had an amendment passed that reduced the lame duck period between election and inaugural, and faced a serious battle trying to get the Supreme Court to accept his legislation. What happens if, in the darkest days of the Depression, FDR opts to try a constitutional convention, with the direct intent of empowering the federal government to build a welfare state?

He might very well redraft the constitution!

Point is, once its tried, a Constitutional Convention might someday happen.
 
A quibble on terminology: a "Constitutional Convention" is a convention for the purpose of drafting a new constitution or proposing a major overhaul of an existing convention. What was almost called was something else, a "Convention for proposing Amendments", which substitutes for Congress's role in the amendment process (approving draft language for one or more amendments, which then go to the states for ratification).

Most likely, the convention drafts an amendment for direct election of Senators, votes down calls for further proposals, and adjourns.

Next most likely would be for the convention to propose several items from the Populist wish list as amendments, such as direct election of the President, some form of recall provisions (especially for judges), women's suffrage, free coinage of silver, ending child labor, and weakening 14th amendment protections against business regulation (at the time, courts often struck down regulations under a substantive due process right to "freedom of contract"). The additional amendments would be protested as illegal by states that had authorized a call for convention only to propose direct election of Senators, but these will be moot as the other amendments are very unlikely to come anywhere near getting enough votes to ratify.

A full "runaway convention" scenario, turning the convention into a true Constitution Convention, is most unlikely. Even if it happened, the convention's proposals would go nowhere, and it might even fail to produce a successful amendment for direct election of Senators.
 
Top