Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (47549)	12/20/2010 1:29:27 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Sanford V. Levinson, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Texas, called the proposal “a really terrible idea” because it would give the same weight to small states as it would to large ones, allowing those with a relatively small proportion of the national population to have outsize influence. One possible modification I've seen to respond to that is a change to require not just 2/3rds of the states, but 2/3rds of the states representing at least 1/2 of the population. But in practice I think getting 2/3rds to vote for repeal would be very rare. It may never happen even in the unlikely event that this amendment is passed. And if it does happen you likely will have more than 2/3rds and at least half the population anyway.