Higher bar for statehood: supermajority vote could block new states
H.J.Res. 99 — Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide that new States may be admitted to the United States upon a concurrence of two thirds of each house of Congress. · Filed by Tom McClintock (R-CA) · 3 cosponsors · Introduced Jun 6, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This joint resolution proposes a constitutional amendment that would lower the threshold for admitting new states to the Union from a simple majority to a two-thirds supermajority in both chambers of Congress. Currently, Article IV of the Constitution allows Congress to admit new states by simple majority vote; this amendment would make that process harder by requiring a two-thirds supermajority in each house.
Why we flagged it
This is a straightforward constitutional amendment proposal that modifies the statehood admission threshold. It is not a statute, appropriation, or rider—it is a formal proposal to amend the Constitution itself, which requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures to take effect.
What the text implies
- Raises the admission threshold from 50% to 67% of each chamber, effectively giving a coalition of 34 senators or 145 representatives veto power over statehood—a significant shift in gatekeeping authority.
- May disproportionately affect U.S. territories (Puerto Rico, D.C., Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands) whose residents lack voting representation in Congress, as the higher threshold makes their path to statehood and voting representation more difficult.
- Could entrench the current balance of Senate power by making it harder for new states to shift partisan composition, since admission requires supermajority consensus rather than simple majority.
- Does not address whether the amendment applies retroactively or only to future admissions; ratification debates may center on this ambiguity.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The amendment raises the procedural bar for statehood, which could block admission of territories seeking self-determination (a democratic cost to those populations) but also preserves existing states' relative power in the Senate and House. The net effect depends on which territories might seek admission and whether one views statehood as a democratic right or a discretionary privilege.
Named in the bill
U.S. House of Representatives, Congress, Article IV of the Constitution, State legislatures, Tom McClintock (sponsor), Andy Biggs (cosponsor), Scott Perry (cosponsor)
Where it stands
3 cosponsors: 3 Republicans.
- Jun 6, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jun 6, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (1,210 characters) on Jun 8, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
As of — page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Higher bar for statehood: supermajority vote could block new states” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hjres99 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.