New. This subsection would establish a short limitation period. Since the introduction of judicial review should not be allowed to delay the amending process unduly, any claim must be raised promptly. The limitations period combined with expedited judicial procedures is designed to result in early presentation and resolution of any dispute. [ (b) Every claim arising under this Act shall be barred unless suit is filed thereon within sixty days after such claim first arises.] Appendix B Article V Applications Submitted Since 1789 PART ONE: A Tabulation of Applications By Barbara Prager and Gregory Milmoe* A Note on the This table is offered as a comprehensive compila. tion of Article V applications categorized by state and by application content. The table maximizes the number of applications, i.e., whenever any source recognizes an application, it has been included in this table. For this reason it must be emphasized that the totals are valuable only as an overview and not for the purpose of determining whether two-thirds of the states have applied for a convention on any given category. Allowing for slight semantic differences among the authorities consulted, the categories used are, for the most part, generally accepted. Any readily discernible differences are set forth in the notes below. A more serious problem is the sometimes sharp disparity among the sources consulted with regard to what should be recognized as an application. Rather than attempt to make definitive judgments as to what applications should be treated as such, we have set out in the notes below the generally recognized applications followed by the applications recognized by particular sources. A total of six sources were selected for consultation in the preparation of this table. They are: (continued on page 62) * Barbara Prager is a student at New York Law School and Gregory Milmoe a student at Fordham Law School. We are deeply grateful to them for their time and efforts in preparing these documents for our Committee and are pleased to have them accompany our report. We believe they present an excellent overview of the types of applications which have been submitted to Congress since the adoption of the Constitution. General (continued from page 59) Buckwalter, "Constitutional Conventions and State Legislators," 20 J.Pub. L. 543 (1971) [hereinafter cited as Buckwalter]; Graham, "The Role of the States in Proposing Constitutional Amendments," 49 A.B.A.J. 1175 (1963) [hereinafter cited as Graham]; E. Hutton, State Applications to Congress Calling for Conventions to Propose Constitutional Amendments (January 1963 to June 8, 1973), June 12, 1973 (Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, American Law Division Paper) [hereinafter cited as Library of Congress Study]; Hearings on S. 2307 Before the Subcomm. on Separation of Powers of the Senate Comm. on the Judiciary, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. 115-18 (1967) [hereinafter cited as 1967 Hearings]; Tydings, Federal Constitutional Convention, S. Doc. No. 78, 71st Cong., 2d Sess. (1930) [hereinafter cited as 1930 S.Doc.]; and W. Pullen, "The Application Clause of the Amending Provision of the Constitution," 1951 (unpublished dissertation in Univ. of North Carolina Library) [hereinafter cited as Pullen]. It should be noted that certain of the studies consider only limited time periods and, therefore, were consulted only for the time periods indicated: Buckwalter (1788-1971); Graham (1788-1963); Library of Congress Study (1963-73); 1967 Hearings (1963-67); 1930 S. Doc. (1788-1911); Pullen (1788-1951). Buckwalter, Pullen, 1930 S. Doc. and Graham were consulted. All sources cite: Ga. 1832; Mo. 1907; N.Y. 1789; Tex. 1899; Ga. 1788; Wis. 1929. Buckwalter, Pullen and Graham cite: III. 1861; Ind. 1861; Ky. 1861; Ohio 1861; Wash. 1901; Wis. 1911. Buckwalter and Graham cite: Va. 1861. Pullen cites: Ky. 1863; N.J. 1861; N.C. 1866; Ore. 1864; S.C. 1832. Buckwalter apparently categorized 15 applications as "General" applications, which he also included in his "Direct Election of Senators" category. They are: Colo. 1901; III. 1903; Iowa 1907, 1909; Kan. 1901, 1905, 1907; La. 1907; Mont. 1911; Neb. 1907; Nev. 1907; N.C. 1907; Okla. 1908; Ore. 1901; Wash. 1903. |