This article examines the diachronic development of hedged performatives (HP) in spoken American English. HPs (e.g. I have to say, I must admit) combine a (semi-)modal verb and a performative verb, and were first analyzed by Fraser (1975). While subsequent research has investigated their discursive functions and established them as ‘constructions’, their diachronic development has not been analyzed within a Construction Grammar perspective. This article addresses this gap using three corpora: the TV Corpus, Movie Corpus and spoken COCA. We investigate fifteen HPs formed with three modals (have to, must, can), first sketching a constructional network with a macro-level ([I + MODAL + Vperf]), modal-specific meso-level (e.g. [I must Vperf]) and micro-level (e.g. [I must say]). Results show different diachronic trends at the meso-level: [I must Vperf] declines, [I have to Vperf] increases, and [I can Vperf] remains stable. These trends diverge from those of the base modals, confirming their constructional status. For must and have to HPs, change operates primarily at the meso-level, driven by evolving discourse norms. At the micro-level, must/have to HPs follow the meso-level trend, while can HPs show more variation. Finally, HPs are overrepresented in scripted speech, although diachronic trends remain consistent across registers.