Constitutional Amendments: Never ratified
After ratification of the Constitution in 1788, Congress approved twelve Articles of Amendment which were sent to the states for ratification. By 1791 the states had approved numbers 3 through 12 which became Amendments, I through X, popularly called the Bill of Rights. In 1992, (yep, 1992: that's not a typo) proposed Article #2 was ratified to become Amendment XXVII. Proposal #1, has never been ratified (but like #2 was proposed in 1789), is still out there and subject to ratification should the states decide to do so. However, proposal #1 is about apportionment for representation in the House and the subject was covered later by another amendment so, it is not likely that #1 will ever be ratified.
Amendment XXVII, ratified in 1992 (201 years late), limits the effective date of congressional pay raises to the next Congress AFTER the one which voted for the pay raise. That would seem to plug a gaping hole in the Constitution... but it didn't. Those worms didn't miss a beat. They enacted a law which provides a cost-of-living adjustment, a COLA. Now they automatically get raises based on inflation, but inflation for Congress is different than inflation for other folks. For example, Social Security provides about 1.0 to 1.9 percent (1997-2000.) Congress gets 3.0 to 5.0 percent. The congressional COLA law was passed in the wee hours of the morning and naturally the Republicans blame the Democrats, the Democrats blame the Republicans, and the press is much too busy with such important matters as Monica to publish how members voted or to point out that Representatives and Senators connived to circumvent the law.
Beginning in 1919, with the proposal which became Amendment XVIII (prohibition of alcohol), Congress began to include a time limit of 7 years for ratification. This seems reasonable to most people but, naturally, somebody brought a lawsuit over the limitation. The Supreme Court quickly issued a ruling that they didn't have a dog in that fight ("purely political question," it declared), so it is now customary to have such a limit. Nonsense! The Constitution doesn't give Congress the power to place a time limit on a proposed Article of Amendment. "Time limits" is just another example of congressional over-reaching. If it's such a good idea, change the Constitution to permit it.
There is more than one way to change the Constitution. Here are the ways it can be done:
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; ..."
Since the Constitution was adopted, there have been 27 amendments added and 6 which have NOT been ratified. The following have been offered by Congress but not ratified by the states:
1789 - Re-apportionment. Still open for ratification. [Defines a number limit of constituents for Representatives, i.e., 30,000; 40,000; 50,000; etc. This is a very bad idea. It would allow an unlimited number of seats in the House. -- Instead of re-apportionment, the House would just add members as the population increases.]
1800 - Titles of Nobility. Still open. [If anyone accepts a title, i.e., King, Duke, Baron, Earl, etc., citizenship is forfeited. This proposal was printed by the government as part of the Constitution (as though it had been ratified) from the time it was proposed until about 1850 when the error was discovered. It has not been ratified.]
1861 - Slavery. Still open but you can bet it will never be ratified. Here's the proposed text:
No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with th