Scorecard
This table lists every idea we have evaluated: 12 proposed, 23 candidate, and 16 rejected entries, all judged by the same criteria. The bipartisan floor is the level of support in the less supportive party, with the pollster and year. The verdict applies our standard scale (Strong ≥ 60, Moderate 45–59, Weak < 45, or Unpolled). The last column names the specific test each entry cleared, is waiting on, or failed. Each row links to the page that carries the full evidence.
| Proposal | Kind | Where it stands | Bipartisan floor | Verdict | The test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abolition of the Punishment Exception | category | Proposed | 66 R / 85 D — YouGov 2024 | Strong — the narrowest party gap in the corpus at 19 points; the federal clause itself has never been polled | Adopted |
| Campaign Finance | category | Proposed | 71 R / 76 D — Pew Research Center 2023 | Strong | Adopted |
| Ethics | category | Proposed | 87 R / 88 D — University of Maryland Program for Public Consultation 2023 | Strong on the trading ban; the presidential-emoluments piece is thinner and framing-dependent | Adopted |
| Executive Compliance with the Courts | category | Proposed | 78 R / 92 D — Marquette Law School Poll 2025 | Strong — stable across ten Marquette waves since 2019, never below 76% among Republicans | Adopted |
| Limited Presidential Pardon Reform | category | Proposed | 64 R / 88 D — YouGov for Protect Democracy (advocacy-commissioned) 2024 | Moderate to Strong — the publication requirement now reads 79% (79% R / 83% D), YouGov May 2026 | Adopted |
| Lobbying | category | Proposed | 72 R / 72 D — Program for Public Consultation, University of Maryland 2022 | Strong — Republican support matches Democratic support on the foreign-lobbying ban | Adopted |
| Privacy | category | Proposed | 68 R / 78 D — Pew Research Center 2023 | Strong on the data-privacy framing; the constitutional right itself is unpolled | Adopted |
| Redistricting | category | Proposed | 70 R / 73 D — Marquette Law School Poll 2025 | Strong on the mid-decade rule; the wider fairness standard remains a separately gated candidate | Adopted |
| Term Limits | category | Proposed | 90 R / 86 D — Pew Research Center 2023 | Strong — the smallest partisan gap of any structural reform in the corpus | Adopted |
| A prospective effective date | clause · thirteenth-exception | Proposed | — | Adopted — offered as an optional section and adopted by the founder on 2026-08-18 | Adopted — Article 9, Section 4 |
| A retirement age for federal judges | clause · term-limits | Proposed | 68 R / 82 D — Pew Research Center 2023 | Strong — corroborated at 71% R / 92% D (Fox News crosstabs, 2024) | Adopted — Term Limits, Section 5 |
| Confirmation-refusal default for Supreme Court seats | clause · term-limits | Proposed | — | Unpolled — folded on symmetry and drafting-necessity grounds, not on a number | Adopted — Term Limits, Section 4 |
| Age limits for Congress | category | Candidate | 83 R / 78 D — NPR/PBS News/Marist 2026 | Strong on the concept — the highest floor of any candidate category — but the specific age has never been polled with a party split | Concept Strong; named age unpolled |
| Civil servant independence | category | Candidate | 95 R / 96 D — Partnership for Public Service / Impact Research 2024 | Strong on merit hiring, which is not in dispute; the operative removal protection is unpolled and the contested item swung 87-66-78 among Republicans across three years | Regime-coded; operative remedy unpolled |
| Eminent domain limits for private development | category | Candidate | 85 R / 79 D — Saint Index / UMass Lowell Center for Economic and Civic Opinion 2005 | Strong — but stale; the only national party split is from autumn 2005 | Strong but stale; existential test open |
| Fair single-member districting | category | Candidate | 76 R / 92 D — NBC News Decision Desk / SurveyMonkey 2025 | Strong on the neutral-authority layer; the anti-favoritism wording remains unpolled in constitutional form | Strong floor; trade-off untested |
| FBI / DOJ independence | category | Candidate | 44 R / 76 D — Monmouth University Polling Institute 2018 | Weak — the only structural remedy ever polled is eight years old; the diagnosis now runs 53% R / 58% D (Marquette, 2026) | Remedy unpolled since 2018 |
| FCC and independent-agency independence | category | Candidate | 42 R / 61 D — Marquette Law School Poll 2026 | Weak at the newest reading, moving — 54% R in prospective wording eight weeks earlier; the floor oscillates across the Weak/Moderate boundary within one quarter | Regime-coded; forward-looking re-poll |
| Fusion voting | category | Candidate | 55 R / 61 D — Fairleigh Dickinson University (New Jersey only) 2023 | Unpolled nationally — the best direct reading is one state, three years old, and would be Moderate rather than Strong even if it were national | Unpolled nationally; existential test open |
| Good-government data | category | Candidate | — | Unpolled as a mandate — the nearest party-split proxy is 45% R / 58% D on open data (Pew 2014), and the trust series flips by regime | Unpolled mandate; regime-coded |
| Proportional representation | category | Candidate | — | Unpolled — no independent national poll with a party breakdown asks the mechanism; framings on the same idea spread from 24% to 63% | Unpolled; statutory route open |
| Stopping unlawful executive action | category | Candidate | 37 R / 88 D — Marquette Law School Poll 2025 | Weak on appropriations; executive privilege unpolled; immunity Moderate at 54% R (Ipsos 2024) and regime-coded | Symmetric appropriations poll unrun; sub-items gated separately |
| Supermajority for the Supreme Court to strike down federal laws | category | Candidate | — | Unpolled — no independent national poll with a party breakdown asks the mechanism; proxies are regime-coded (Court approval 75% R / 11% D, Gallup 2025) | Unpolled; regime-coded proxies |
| A ban on work requirements as such | clause · thirteenth-exception | Candidate | — | Unpolled — this is the maximal reading of the amendment and is not what any ballot measure asked | Unpolled; goes beyond both the polled proposition and the international norm |
| A constitutional wage floor for prison work | clause · thirteenth-exception | Candidate | — | Unpolled — never asked in any form | Unpolled; would convert a deletion into a fiscal mandate on all fifty states |
| A lifetime ban on all compensated lobbying | clause · lobbying | Candidate | 47.5 R / 54.4 D — UMD Program for Public Consultation (Q37 acceptability) 2022 | Moderate — and measured on the wrong instrument; the five-year door out-polls it by 18 points in the less-supportive party | Standalone favor/oppose re-test clearing 60% in both parties |
| A private-hire prohibition | clause · thirteenth-exception | Candidate | — | Unpolled — never asked in the United States in any form | Unpolled; a new substantive rule rather than a deletion |
| A private-sector data-protection section | clause · privacy | Candidate | 68 R / 78 D — Pew Research Center (adjacent: more government regulation of what companies do with personal data — the statutory version, not constitutional text) 2023 | Unpolled as constitutional text — the statutory substance is Strong in every party split (68% R / 78% D regulation; 89% R / 77% D company deletion tools), but no survey has asked whether the rulebook belongs in the Constitution, and the two honest framings have never been tested against each other | Commissioned split-sample instrument: rights-in-the-data vs fiduciary-duty framings, each costs-named, each priced against an identical statutory companion |
| An anti-favoritism standard for district maps | clause · redistricting | Candidate | — | Unpolled federally — the standard is ratified state text four times over (FL 2010, CO 2018, MI 2018, UT 2018), but ballot totals do not yield a party floor | Held back from Article 6 pending a party-split poll; four state ratifications justify commissioning the question, not un-holding the clause |
| An enforceable emoluments clause | clause · ethics | Candidate | 33 R / 82 D — Economist/YouGov (conduct framing; the remedy itself has no published party split) 2026 | Unpolled on the remedy (71% overall, no crosstabs) — Weak on every fielded framing of the underlying conduct, and the newest reading is worse, not better | Neutral both-parties polling on emoluments enforcement |
| Consequences for willful defiance of a court order | clause · executive-compliance | Candidate | — | Unpolled — the parent article's 76-80% Republican floor covers the duty and says nothing about the penalty; the nearest measurement of an appetite for penalties runs the other way (70% oppose impeaching judges, 52% R) | Three separate favor/oppose items, 60% floor each; must state who adjudicates after Trump v. Anderson |
| Independent enforcement of court judgments | clause · executive-compliance | Candidate | — | Unpolled — the mechanism has never been measured in any independent survey, and the design work behind it is unfinished | Unpolled; separation-of-powers design unfinished |
| No clemency for the president's own conspirators | clause · pardon-reform | Candidate | 43 R / 79 D — YouGov (independent national) 2026 | Weak — the number moved down, not up, when the advocacy poll was replaced by an independent one; the three adjacent framings cluster at 42-44% R | Forward-looking both-parties wording on the coordination mechanism, not the 'allies' relationship |
| Presidential self-pardon ban | clause · pardon-reform | Candidate | 61 R / 85 D — YouGov (independent national) 2026 | Strong (2026) / Weak (2024) — instrument-dependent | Reopened; one independent forward-looking replication clearing 60% R |
| Uniformity and the Thornton settlement | clause · term-limits | Candidate | — | Unpolled — and, unusually, unpollable in a form that would carry a verdict; it adds no rule, only a canon of construction | Drafting counsel, not a poll; the state-election-power half risks being read against the redistricting article |
| Abortion | category | Rejected | 25 R / 87 D — UMass Amherst/YouGov 2024 | Weak — no consensus framing exists in either direction | High topline, low floor; no symmetric rule |
| Balanced Budget | category | Rejected | 84 R / 68 D — Economist/YouGov (abstract question) 2026 | Strong but shallow — 72% in the abstract collapsing to 31% overall when entitlement cuts are specified (Fox News, 2011) | Depth: collapses under trade-offs |
| Civic Information and Informed Citizenry | category | Rejected | — | Unpolled — no credible national data on any version of the proposal | Existential test; statutory, not constitutional |
| Election Technology and Modernization | category | Rejected | 15 R / 39 D — AP-NORC 2020 | Weak — not bipartisan and not popular; no majority in either party since 2022 | Not popular; statutory |
| Electoral College and Presidential Elections | category | Rejected | 46 R / 80 D — Pew Research Center 2024 | Weak — borderline Moderate on the general question and far below it in amendment wording (26-43% R) | Low floor that moves with outcomes |
| Eliminate Qualified Immunity for Policing | category | Rejected | 42 R / 79 D — Cato Institute/YouGov 2020 | Weak and stale — every credible number is from June 2020 to May 2022, and the one re-poll declined | High topline, low floor; stale; statutory |
| Expanding the House of Representatives | category | Rejected | 23 R / 35 D — Pew Research Center 2023 | Weak — 23% R on the plain question and 11% R when the costs are named (2006) | Weak floor; depth tested and failed; why-an-amendment (the size of the House has been a statute since 1929) |
| Filibuster reform | category | Rejected | 8 R / 30 D — Monmouth University Polling Institute 2022 | Weak — both directions fail; 8% R for elimination and 19% D for keeping it as is | Regime-coded; both directions fail symmetry |
| Senate and Congressional Structure | category | Rejected | 19 R / 45 D — Pew Research Center 2023 | Weak — the topline itself is a minority, and the Republican floor has never exceeded 19% in three independent measurements across five years | Low floor; symmetry; Article V equal-suffrage bar |
| Statehood for DC and Puerto Rico | category | Rejected | 13 R / 64 D — Yahoo News/YouGov (DC) 2021 | Weak — DC at 13% R, the weakest floor anywhere in the corpus; Puerto Rico at 41% R with admission available by statute | Weak floor and symmetry (DC); why-an-amendment (Puerto Rico, since admission is a statute under Article IV Section 3) |
| Supreme Court Expansion | category | Rejected | 39 R / 62 D — Marquette Law School Poll 2026 | Weak — a Weak floor under every independent measurement since 2019 | High topline, low floor; statutory; fails symmetry for expansion |
| Voting Rights | category | Rejected | 32 R / 83 D — Pew Research Center 2025 | Weak — each party's package is a remedy for the other party's conduct | High topline, low floor; fails symmetry |
| A constitutional right to deletion | clause · privacy | Rejected | 30 R / 41 D — Pew Research Center (deletion applied to law-enforcement records) 2019 | Weak on the piece that distinguishes this clause from the adopted text — deletion polls as a consumer right and collapses as a records right, along the line the First Amendment already draws | High topline, low floor; blast radius (First Amendment collision); framing dependency |
| Congressional disapproval of pardons | clause · pardon-reform | Rejected | 30 R / 73 D — YouGov (independent national) 2026 | Weak — the worst-performing item in the same battery that gives the ratified article its strongest number | High topline, low floor; abuse-vs-remedy gap; the mercy-destruction trap |
| Extending the trading ban to all federal employees | clause · ethics | Rejected | 41.6 R / 37.1 D — UMD Program for Public Consultation (Q12, deliberative) 2023 | Weak in both parties — support drops from 86% to 40% when the covered class is widened, and the party split is five points wide | Depth (trade-off collapse); blast radius; no why-an-amendment answer of its own |
| Forced sale of existing holdings | clause · ethics | Rejected | — | Unpolled by party — the one direct measurement puts the mechanism at 26% against 69% saying it goes too far, from the same respondents who endorsed the underlying principle by 67% | Abuse-vs-remedy gap and depth, failing together in one instrument; blast radius; staleness |
The mission page describes how the criteria work. The polling questions page carries the survey wording candidates wait on. The polling evidence page holds the underlying numbers with full party breakdowns.