Even when Americans vote for candidates who talk a good game about limiting the power and reach of the federal government, Washington, D.C., just keeps growing.

Spending rises. Debt climbs. Federal agencies reach further into areas once left to the states and the people.

That is not simply a problem of electing the wrong person. It is a problem with incentives.

Members of Congress are rewarded for bringing money home, gaining power, and winning the next election. Few are eager to vote for limits on their own authority, budgets, or time in office. Even well-meaning lawmakers enter a system built to protect and expand itself.

Consider congressional term limits. In January 2025, Sen. Ted Cruz introduced a constitutional amendment that would limit senators to two terms and representatives to three terms. It was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on the day it was introduced, where it has remained in the darkness.

The idea is not new. Term-limits proposals have appeared again and again in Congress. They generate headlines, speeches, and applause. But they do not receive the supermajority support needed to send an amendment to the states. Often such proposals never reach the floor of the House or Senate.

Why would Congress make it easier to replace Congress?

Washington will never voluntarily surrender the power it has accumulated. Nor will it reliably restrain its spending when spending buys influence, favors, and votes. Occasionally changing officeholders may alter the rhetoric, but it has not changed the direction of the federal government.

The Framers Saw This Problem

The Founders did not expect federal officials to police themselves forever. George Mason and the other framers built a remedy into the Constitution.
Article V gives two paths for proposing constitutional amendments. Congress may propose them with a two-thirds vote of both houses. Or two-thirds of the state legislatures, now 34 states, may apply for a convention to propose amendments.

That second path does not depend on Congress agreeing to limit itself. Article V says that Congress shall call a convention when the required number of state legislatures apply. Any amendment proposed through that process must still be ratified by three-fourths of the states, or 38 states, before it becomes part of the Constitution.

That is the furthest thing from a shortcut or an easy path. It is a high bar designed to ensure that only amendments with broad national support can possibly succeed.

The States Are the Check

The Convention of States effort calls for an Article V convention focused on three goals:

• Limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government.
• Imposing fiscal restraints on Washington.
• Setting term limits for federal officials and members of Congress

This is the constitutional answer to the cynical or defeatist shrug: “Whaddaya gonna do about it?”

The answer is that the people can act through their state legislatures. The Constitution provides the mechanism. The states provide the check. The people provide the will.
Washington has shown that it will not limit itself. It is time for the states to use the power the framers gave them.

Learn more about Article V and the Convention of States process by clicking here.