proposed constitutional amendment

[Sanford Levinson]

I think that Rick Friedman's proposed constitutional amendment is a good idea:


I think we ought to try to shame
>the Republican Congress into proposing a constitutional amendment making
>the popular vote determinative or, in the alternative, (A) making the
>number of electoral votes in each state equal to the number of
>representatives of each state (rather than the number of reps plus 2, a
>distortive factor) and (B) giving the electoral votes to the winner of each
>Congressional district.

I would add to it a provision saying that if the Electoral College did not
choose a winner, the House would choose on a one member, one vote basis
(instead of one-state--one vote).  As a practical problem the small states
that benefit from the present electoral college system (because of the
automatic addition of two votes) would take advantage of their power under
Article V to refuse to ratify it, just another example of the gridlock that
the Framers built into our system that ill serves us in this new
millennium.  I confess that one reason I take a certain pleasure in the
present discontents is the hope that it might lead to some intelligent
debate about constitutional inadequacies (or "stupidities") instead of the
more typical posture of constitutional cheerleading.  Perhaps it is time
for an Article V constitutional convention to try to draft a suitable
system of presidential elections, to be submitted, a la Akhil Amar's idea,
to a national referendum as a way around the small-state veto power of
Article V.  I suspect that David Dow would find this "revolutionary" as
well, but it is a very mild form of revolution.  David has a fine article
in a book that I edited on constitutional amendment in which he attacks
Amar's view.  But, as I've argued numerous times before, I think the
refusal of the legal academy to take Bruce Ackerman's arguments with
sufficient seriousness has the consequence of blinding us to the number of
"revolutions" that have taken place throughout our constitutional history
(including, I would argue, establishing the principle of
one-person--one-vote).

sandy