HOUSE BILL REPORT
SJM 8008
As Reported by House Committee On:
State Government & Tribal Relations
Brief Description: Rescinding prior applications for a constitutional convention to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
Sponsors: Senators Krishnadasan, Pedersen, Hasegawa, Nobles and Trudeau.
Brief History:
Committee Activity:
State Government & Tribal Relations: 3/19/25, 3/25/25 [DP].
Brief Summary of Joint Memorial
  • Rescinds all previous requests by the Legislature for a constitutional convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution.
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE GOVERNMENT & TRIBAL RELATIONS
Majority Report: Do pass.Signed by 4 members:Representatives Mena, Chair; Stearns, Vice Chair; Doglio and Farivar.
Minority Report: Without recommendation.Signed by 3 members:Representatives Waters, Ranking Minority Member; Walsh, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Chase.
Staff: Connor Schiff (786-7093).
Background:

Article V of the United States (US) Constitution (Constitution) set forth procedures for amending the Constitution.  It provides two methods for proposing amendments to the Constitution.  The first method allows Congress to propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.  The second method requires Congress to call a constitutional convention when requested by two-thirds of state legislatures (Article V applications).  Thus far, only the first method has ever been used for proposing amendments.

 

Any amendment proposed under either method is adopted only if ratified by three-quarters of state legislatures or by ratifying conventions conducted in three-quarters of the states.  Twenty-seven of the 33 proposed amendments to the Constitution have been adopted.

 

In 2015 the US House of Representatives began cataloging Article V applications submitted to the House of Representatives after 1960.  However, there is no official state or national repository for Article V applications.  According to one unofficial count, there have been more than 450 Article V applications between 1788 and 1980.  At least 25 Article V applications have been made since 1980. 

 

The following five Article V applications by the Washington Legislature have been identified:

  • House Bill 90 (1901):  Plenary convention with no limitation on subject;
  • House Bill 207 (1903):  Plenary convention highlighting the direct election of US senators;
  • Senate Concurrent Resolution 17 (1909):  Limited convention to ban polygamy (without state seal);
  • Senate Concurrent Resolution 17 (1911):  Limited convention to ban polygamy (with state seal); and
  • House Joint Memorial 1 (1963):  Limited convention to prohibit federal restraint of the state initiative power to redistrict and remove federal judicial oversight of redistricting.

 

Article V does not specify an expiration date for Article V applications and there is no consensus among legal scholars on whether applications expire or the effect of recissions.
Summary of Bill:

The Legislature informs the President and Congress that Washington rescinds, repeals, cancels, nullifies, and supersedes any and all prior applications for a constitutional convention under Article V of the United States Constitution, regardless of: 

  • when the applications were made;
  • whether the applications were for a more limited convention to propose one or more amendments regarding one or more specific subjects and purposes or for a general convention to propose an unlimited number of amendments upon an unlimited number of subjects; and
  • whether the applications are confirmed by historical records maintained by the state or the Library of Congress.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Not requested.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:

(In support) This joint memorial rescinds all five of Washington's applications for a constitutional convention so that Washington does not unintentionally trigger a constitutional convention.  All of these applications were submitted before our time and do not reflect the people and problems present today.  These past issues are no longer pertinent.  If necessary, the state can make an application for a constitutional convention in the future.  A future application would be reflective of the people of that time.  Rescinding the previous applications gives the state a clean slate and is long overdue.  This would protect responsible governance.  Amending the constitution sounds good on paper but there would be a lot of problems; no one knows how a constitutional convention would work and a constitutional convention could degrade into a constitutional crisis.  The Constitution has held strong for 250 years and will continue to hold strong.

 

(Opposed) None. 
Persons Testifying:

Senator Deborah Krishnadasan, prime sponsor; Charles Beck; and Dennis Eagle, WA Federation of State Employees.
Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying:

Ezekiel Lyen.