How I Voted: Rescinding Prior Calls for an Article V Constitutional Convention

Bill: H.4692 and S.2684, Resolutions Rescinding Prior Calls for an Article V Constitutional Convention

Date of Vote: November 19, 2025

What Problem Was This Legislation Trying to Solve?

Article V of the United States Constitution allows states to request a national constitutional convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. If two-thirds of state legislatures submit valid applications, Congress may call such a convention.

Massachusetts had several Article V applications that had been approved decades ago and remained technically active, including resolutions addressing issues that no longer reflected the current views of the Legislature or the Commonwealth. Some legal advocates argued that these older applications could still be counted toward the threshold required to call a convention.

Supporters of this legislation believed that outdated resolutions should not be used to advance a constitutional convention without the explicit consent of today's elected representatives and the residents they serve.

What Does the Legislation Do?

• Rescinds all prior Massachusetts applications for an Article V Constitutional Convention.

• Removes several decades-old resolutions from consideration in any future effort to reach the constitutional threshold required to call a convention.

• Affirms that any future request for a constitutional convention should be considered and approved by the current Legislature rather than relying on resolutions adopted by previous generations of lawmakers.

• Directs the House and Senate Clerks to transmit the rescission resolutions to the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Secretary of the U.S. Senate.

• Makes Massachusetts the seventeenth state to formally rescind all prior Article V convention applications.

How I Voted

I voted YES.

Why I Voted This Way

The United States Constitution provides a process for proposing amendments, including the possibility of a convention called by the states. However, decisions of this magnitude should reflect the judgment of current lawmakers and the people they represent, not resolutions adopted decades ago under very different circumstances.

This legislation does not change the Constitution or prevent future constitutional amendments from being proposed. Instead, it ensures that Massachusetts is not counted toward a future convention based on applications that may no longer reflect the views of the Commonwealth.

Major constitutional decisions deserve careful deliberation, transparency, and direct accountability to today's voters. If a future Legislature believes a constitutional convention is warranted, it should have the opportunity to consider that question on its own merits.

I supported these resolutions because they reaffirm the principle that significant constitutional actions should reflect the current will of the people and their elected representatives.