WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SJR 2

A joint resolution calling for an Article V convention in order to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the number of terms that a person may serve in Congress.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Jason Schultz

Iowa petitions for constitutional convention to impose congressional term limits, reduce federal power, and add fiscal restraints through Article V amendments.

Subcommittee recommends passage.
#congress #constitutionoftheunitedstates #conventions #federalgovernment #jurisdiction #resolutions #resolutions-substantive #termlimits #unitedstateshouseofrepresentatives #unitedstatessenate
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SJR 2

Legislative bill overview

SJR 2 is a joint resolution requesting Iowa to petition Congress for an Article V constitutional convention—a mechanism allowing states to propose amendments without federal approval. The resolution specifically seeks conventions to draft amendments imposing fiscal constraints on government spending, reducing federal power and jurisdiction, and establishing congressional term limits.

Why is this important

An Article V convention is extraordinarily rare and consequential; only one has succeeded in U.S. history (the 1787 Constitutional Convention itself). If 34 states petition Congress for a convention on the same topic, Congress must call it. Such a convention could fundamentally restructure federal-state power dynamics and alter how Congress operates, affecting every American's relationship with government.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope concerns: Critics worry a convention called for limited purposes could become a "runaway convention" and propose sweeping changes beyond fiscal restraint or term limits, potentially destabilizing foundational constitutional structures
  • State sovereignty vs. federal authority: Proponents see this as state power reasserting itself; opponents view it as undermining the federal system and democratic processes already established for amendment
  • Term limits debate: Congressional term limits are constitutionally contentious—the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton that states cannot impose them, making a constitutional amendment necessary but politically divisive
  • Fiscal constraint definitions: Vague language around "fiscal restraints" could mask disagreement about whether amendments would restrict entitlements, require balanced budgets, or limit specific spending categories

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.