- Apr 30, 2009
- Reaction score
Why don't you weave Howie's statement into your thrilling post. Founders couldn't have imagined that in the future there would be a very large state and a very small one!Apologies, I missed this one. It's tough to keep up with your commitment to posting proclivity! Right, because "states" can take positions on things. They are animate and thusly can or cannot care at their discretion. But "founders" (who, of course weren't representatives from "states," but independent, unaffiliated parties) didn't care. They didn't have huge battles during the Constitutional Conventions about how much they care that threatened the entire process. They aren't "states." They are "founders."
And answer the following questions:
1) would it have made a difference if they could foresee that?
2) If Howie is correct, and all of the founders and states, knowing that in the future there would be rural states and highly populated ones, would they have decided against equal representation in the Senate?
3) if you answer YES, they would have abolished the senate at that time, then what should we do about it today? Abandon the constitution? Amend it?
4) Let me channel Howie: is that likely that 3/4ths of the states will approve?
5) if not, then what? Abandon the constitution?