[rightcoast]

Based on my breakdown, there would be a +3 net gain for Republicans (and a corresponding -3 net loss for Democrats) in seats in the U.S. Senate. This is of course, assuming that politics and party divisions stay exactly the same from now until the time of the amendment, and for the durations of 3 elections past that. Which would never happen.

The point is that the real shift would not be realized in Republican/Democrat power grabs nationally. Instead, the Senate would be a more State-centric body, in tune by design and political necessity to the needs and desires of each Senator's State and State Legislature, and to its people by their election of their own State Legislature.

Federalism, overnight, would cease to be dead. Which, of course, is why this amendment would never see the light of day unless it is started by a Constitutional Convention of states.

[Cboldt]

Yup. It would be a radical change all right. More power to the states, right pronto.

[Political Junkie Too]

Nice analysis. I didn't want to do it. ;-)

As you point out in your post, I too am less interested in the makeup of the Senate as I am the conduct of the Senate. The current structure has created a rogue body that must be reined in by the states.

-PJ