Congress and the Constitution: The Twenty-seventh Amendment and the Past and Future of Constitutional Alteration

The most recent addition to the U.S. Constitution is also one of the first proposed amendments. The 27^th Amendment restricts change to congressional salaries until after the next election. First drafted by James Madison and approved by Congress in 1789, the proposal was among a package of 12 items sent to the states. Ten of those proposed amendments were ratified and became known as the Bill of Rights. The others languished with only occasional attention by constitutional scholars. In the early 1980s, an undergraduate student at the University of Texas wrote a term paper arguing for adoption of the limits on congressional pay raises. After receiving a C grade from his teaching assistant and instructor, the student rejected the opinions of his teachers and independently pursued the adoption of Madison's proposal. Gregory Watson single-handedly mounted a letter-writing and lobbying campaign that caused state legislators to redirect their attention to the proposed amendment. In 1992, following a most unusual ratification process—including certification by the Archivist of the United States—the measure became the 27^th Amendment. In this article, we trace the history of the amendment, demonstrate that its impact has been more symbolic than substantive, and argue that Congress needs to reassert its authority over the amendment process in line with the letter and spirit of Article V. The 27^th Amendment has a peculiar constitutional history, and there are lessons we should learn from that experience.     

The Sherwood Foresters of 1916: memories and memorials

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the memorialisation of the Sherwood Foresters who fought during the Easter Rising of 1916 in Dublin. These men, from Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire in the English midlands, suffered the greatest casualties of the British regiments involved in the insurrection, and participated in the firing squads that executed the rebel leaders. Yet the public and artistic memorialising of these English soldiers is not widely known, and this interdisciplinary paper seeks to tell the unfamiliar story of what happened to the Sherwood Foresters after the fighting of Easter Week ceased. We use archival material in order to explore how, at the time of the Rising, these men believed that they would be remembered. We examine the way that the Sherwood Foresters of Easter Week subsequently appeared in literature and drama. And we analyse the way that those soldiers have been commemorated in funerary memorials.     

Telepresence-Enabled Maritime Archaeological Exploration in the Deep

Telepresence-enabled exploration of deep sea environments has developed over the past 30 years, providing access to archaeologists, scientists, and the general public to sites otherwise inaccessible due to depth. Pioneered through the inception of the JASON Project in the late 1980 s, telepresence missions have expanded to two dedicated ships of exploration, NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer and exploration vessel Nautilus, and has been implemented on a series of opportunistic missions on other vessels. This paper chronicles the history of the use of telepresence for the exploration of shipwrecks in deep water as well as how this capability has allowed the public to engage with such missions. Broadening the scope of who can explore the deep sea, telepresence has also expanded what is observed and documented in the deep, which speaks to humanity’s use of the maritime world and an archaeology of discard through our material disposed of into the deep sea.     

The Importance of Status: The US–ROK Alliance Cohesion and the First Korean Nuclear Crisis, 1993–94

The US–ROK alliance during the First Korean Nuclear Crisis provides the most likely case of high alliance cohesion. Curiously, however, instead of dancing to the American tune in their joint management of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) threat, the Republic of Korea (ROK) caused frequent policy collisions – supporting the US–DPRK negotiations at one point and opposing it at another – at the risk of jeopardizing its physical security. The main finding here is that the variations in the South Korean behavior were a function of their experience of status inconsistency. In particular, the ROK became compliant with the US–DPRK talks when it believed that its desired status marker of taking the leadership role in crisis management was within reach, and unyielding otherwise. These fluctuations ended up not only eroding the US–ROK alliance cohesion but also inhibiting a successful resolution of the crisis. All this bears directly on the fundamental question of whether international politics is to be understood in essentially realist terms.