[Agamemnon]

Actually, no constitutional amendment would be required in the United States. Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution provides that Congress may admit new states. IIRC, all it takes is a majority vote of both houses.

I'm not saying that a Constitutional amendment has to be passed for the US to essentially annex the country next door. The 3/4 concept is a great model to use for acquiring Canada's "better assests," since it is required for something as important as adopting and implementing amendments to the Constitution.

I imagine the wisdom of Founding Fathers realized that a credible national consensus should precede changes to the Constitution. In my view so also should a Nationalization consensus be established -- on both sides of the current borders as evidenced by a 3/4 endorsement as voiced by the people --we who have to live with each other -- and as voiced by their representatives --affirmation of a unified philosophy of government in the US mold.

All citizens will pledge allegiance to the US, and all government entities will swear to uphold the US Constitution. That will change alot of the currently corrupting and nationally unsustainable social policy in Canada overnight, I'd guess.

[conservative in nyc]

Fair enough. But no national consensus by plebiscite was necessary when the stakes of statehood were much higher in the 1800s. Think Missouri Compromise.

Of course, the states appointed Senators then, which isn't true today. Now, there is no one to look out for the interests of federalism.