[El Gato]

I believe a super majority is needed for Congress to amend the constitution, and that ain't gonna happen.

Not only that, but a supermajority of the state legislatures must also ratify it. The later is true even if the amendment is proposed by a Constitutional Convention, the alternative method specified by the Constitution. The Con-Con itself must also be called by a super majority of the state legisaltures. (2/3 majority in both cases). Like you said, that ain't gonna happen.

[Family Guy]

I read on Free Republic within the past few days that Dems were trying to get some usually Republican states to split their electorates according to the popular vote in that state. That would be much easier for them to accomplish since it could be done at the state level and would be worse than a nationwide popular vote because the Dem voters from Republican states would get electoral votes but the Republican voters from Dem states would not.

[dvwjr]

Well, the other possble route would be if the Congress sends any proposed Amendments to the States to be ratified by State Conventions, if three-fourths of State Ratification Conventions vote in the affirmative then a proposed Amendment may become law as happen in the February to December 1933 period for the 21st Amendment. This was the only time that the State Convention method has been used to ratify an Amendment to the Constitution and it has the advantage of allowing the People of the several States vote for Convention delegates in an election to carry out the will of the 50% + 1 voter majority of each State.


Maybe this approach could be used for the "Defense of Marriage" amendment proposal...


dvwjr