LINK The Founding Father That Wanted the Constitution to Change Every 20 Years | Synonym
When Thomas Jefferson asserted that a constitution should change every 19 to 20 years, he was expressing a deep-rooted conviction that governments need to adapt to survive. Although he did not personally participate in drafting the U.S. Constitution, he had strong opinions about what political leaders had to do in order to make it work.
Thomas Jefferson's Letter to Samuel Kercheval
In an 1816 letter to Virginia lawyer Samuel Kercheval on the subject of calling a convention to revise the state's constitution, Jefferson stated that a constitution should be revised every 19 to 20 years. Jefferson's proposed time period was based on the era's mortality rate. Since a majority of adults at any point in time would likely be dead in approximately 19 years, he reasoned, a new generation should have the right to adapt its government to changing circumstances instead of being ruled by the past.
The 20-Year Rebellion
Jefferson's belief in the importance of periodic political change was not limited to state constitutions. For example, in 1787, while he was away serving as the country's ambassador to France, Jefferson wrote a letter to John Adams' assistant discussing the national Constitutional Convention. In this letter, Jefferson mentioned Shays' Rebellion, an armed protest in Massachusetts, and wrote, "god forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion." However, Jefferson did not regard violent conflict as intrinsically necessary. In a letter written shortly before his death in 1824, Jefferson stated that the U.S. Constitution could last perpetually if it were regularly amended to reflect new developments in science and society.
15
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
5 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Chairman Mao thought Revolution should go on forever.
Neither Mao, of Jefferson were correct. Without continuity progress is virtually impossible.
Alienbeing
Level 8
May 31, 2022
0
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand the Constitution should change and adapt with the times and not considered too sacred to change. But on the other hand I would dread that some people would only consider their wants and desires and wouldn't play fair.
I have mixed feelings for term limits as well. Politics is like any other career, experience matters. With term limits I don't see how a person could still be motivated to serve the best interests of their constituents if they can not longer be reelected to another term. I think that would be more of a problem in Congress than it is with the presidential office. I would support a mandatory retirement age, we need younger people in power with more of a stake in the way things are going than someone with one foot in the grave.
What I would really like to see in a new constitution is a change is how people can win an election. Change it so they have to get a majority of votes of all registered voters not just the ones that can show up. If they can't get the majority of voters to come out and vote for them, then they shouldn't be in office. Then we would see changes in how elections are conducted. Special interest groups and big money might not have as much influence. Also the parties may have to change the way the pick nominees if appealing to their base isn't going to be enough to win an election. I could go on but I will stop now. Okay trolls your turn.
ClassicalRebel
Level 5
May 30, 2022
1
The whole idea of "originalism" in constitutional law is deeply flawed. Times change, conditions differ, and society has to adapt in order to survive. It's rather like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, who famously said you have to run as fast as you can just to stay in place. Thomas Jefferson was indeed a forward-looking man.
Flyingsaucesir
Level 8
May 28, 2022
3
Except for the Slavery thing, eh?
@Charlene Not excusing it, but was it was a different time.
Indeed..just as politicians need a defined Retirement age..
Charlene
Level 9
May 28, 2022
4
OMG yes! two terms and you're out for at least a term, and no more after 65. No more old white men running and ruining the country.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.