Origins and Initial Proposal
James Madison's idea for the 27th Amendment emerged during the first Congress in 1789. It addressed concerns about fairness and corruption in setting Congressional pay. Madison proposed that Congress could set its pay, but changes wouldn't take effect until after the next election, making voters the final authority on potential abuses.
The era was ripe with concerns over government officials' motivations. To combat potential corruption, the framers included the Incompatibility Clause, barring anyone holding office from being in Congress. But salaries were left for Congress to decide, a power many viewed cautiously.
Madison drafted 12 amendments, with ten becoming the Bill of Rights. The proposal on Congressional pay was ratified by six states by 1791, then drifted into dormancy until Gregory Watson, a University of Texas sophomore, revived interest in 1982.

Dormancy and Sporadic Ratification Attempts
After the initial six states ratified it by 1791, the amendment was largely forgotten. In 1873, Congress passed the "Salary Grab Act," granting itself a pay hike. This move irritated the public, and Ohio ratified Madison's amendment in response. In 1977, following another Congressional pay increase, Wyoming also ratified the amendment. However, these isolated actions failed to generate widespread support or action.
The general public's disinterest stemmed from skepticism that anything could rein in Congressional self-interest. The amendment's relevance only peaked when lawmakers' salaries intersected with scandals about government waste.

Gregory Watson's Campaign
In 1982, Gregory Watson, a University of Texas sophomore, discovered the forgotten Congressional pay amendment during a class assignment. Seeing its potential, he wrote a term paper arguing for its viability. His professor gave him a C, but Watson wasn't deterred.
Driven by determination, Watson started a grassroots campaign. He lobbied state lawmakers through persistent letter-writing and door-knocking. Initially dismissed, Watson's efforts gained traction when Maine ratified the amendment in 1983, followed by Colorado in 1984.
Watson's campaign coincided with public anger over congressional self-interest. He poured his finances into more letter-writing campaigns, leveraging this sentiment. Five states ratified the amendment in 1985 alone, and momentum continued to build through the decade.
On May 7, 1992, Michigan became the 38th state to ratify the amendment, meeting the constitutional requirement. The Archivist of the United States certified it as the 27th Amendment, and Congress confirmed it.

Final Push and Ratification
By the late 1980s, Watson's campaign had gained significant momentum, aided by growing public discontent over congressional pay raises. His grassroots efforts expanded, with letters flowing to lawmakers across the nation. Media coverage of Watson's underdog story further amplified support.
As states continued to ratify the amendment, even skeptical lawmakers began to take notice. The political landscape became more receptive to anything that could improve their image with a skeptical electorate.
Ratification Timeline:
- 1985: Five states ratify the amendment
- Late 1980s – Early 1990s: Increasing pace of ratifications
- May 7, 1992: Michigan becomes the 38th state to ratify
- May 18, 1992: Archivist of the United States certifies the amendment
- May 20, 1992: Congress officially recognizes the 27th Amendment

Legal and Scholarly Debates
The ratification of the 27th Amendment sparked debates among legal scholars. Critics questioned the legitimacy of a ratification process spanning over two centuries, arguing it violated the intent of Article V of the Constitution. They cited the 1921 Supreme Court case Dillon v. Gloss, which suggested ratification should be a relatively quick, contemporary affair.
Supporters countered that Article V doesn't specify a time limit for ratification. They argued that Watson's campaign met the criteria: two-thirds of Congress proposed the amendment, and three-fourths of the states ratified it.
The role of U.S. Archivist Don Wilson became a focal point. Despite pressure from skeptical lawmakers and scholars, Wilson certified the amendment and published it in the Federal Register, viewing his role as purely ministerial.
"We the People" have the power to drive constitutional change.
Congress passed a resolution affirming the amendment, though this was largely ceremonial. Questions lingered about the precedent set by accepting such a prolonged ratification process, including concerns about other dormant amendments potentially being revived.
Ultimately, popular will triumphed over academic debates. The 27th Amendment stands as a reminder of the power vested in "We the People" and the potential for citizen-driven change in the constitutional process.

- Bernstein RB. The Sleeper Wakes: The History and Legacy of the Twenty-Seventh Amendment. Fordham Law Review. 1992;61(3):497-557.
- Kyvig DE. Explicit and Authentic Acts: Amending the U.S. Constitution, 1776-2015. University Press of Kansas; 2016.
- Paulsen MV. A General Theory of Article V: The Constitutional Lessons of the Twenty-seventh Amendment. Yale Law Journal. 1993;103(3):677-789.