Replies

I don't think this is a subject any one really cares about...This is one of those items that's beeb run to the ground, as are these

The Illinois State House passed ERA Amendment, and it is will be voted upon in the Illinois State Senate after summer recess.

If you are not familiar with ERA, this is NOT about equal rights for women or minorities. The ERA Amendment states: Section 1: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex. Section 2: Congress shall have the power to enforce by appropriate legislation the provisions of the aritcle. Section 3: This Amendment shall take affect two years after the date of ratification.

Proponents of the ERA believe that they can begin again where they left off with the ratification process. 35 states have already ratified the ERA...Illinois would make 36. 37 states are needed to pass a constitutional amendment.

The word must get out about this before the Illinois Senate passes ERA. This Amendment would jeopardize the true equal protection of the existing 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

SSf, you are right about ERA. I am of the time when it was first brought out and we were told it was all for the women and children. Boy, was I lied to! I read this amendment and it says "on account of sex" not gender. This means just what it says and the Illinois public is so naive as to think it means gender. This is an amendment to the CONSTITUTION!!!!!What are they thinking in Springfield? We do not need to give special status to someone due to behavior. Right now according to my representative, it is an empty bill...no substance at all. The legislature will decide what it means. That's just great.
Anyone interested, call your senator. At least if this thing passes it needs to be specific as to meaning.
Whew. Now I feel better.

Before you try to start getting everyone all worked up, please make sure you know what you're talking about, first.

1) The original ERA that *almost* got ratified had a time limit on the ratification process built into it. That expired on June 30th, 1982, 3 short of the 38 states needed to ratify it. That particular legislative process is a dead issue, and it doesn't matter if the rest of the 50 states pass resolutions in favor of it, it cannot become part of the Constitution.

2) The text you quote is from a new effort to get an ERA passed. If all 50 states pass it, it won't become a part of the Constitution either, because before an amendment to the federal Constitution can be validly acted on by the States, it must first be passed by both houses of Congress, and this text (missing the ratification time limit) hasn't done so. Only after it has done so can the States validly bring it to a vote.

Oh, and, finally, 38 states are needed to pass a Constitutional Amendment, not 37. 50 * .75 = 37.5, and you have to round up. 37 states is 74%, not 75%, of 50.