Voting Rights   Leave a comment

I’m working my way through the US Constitution’s amendments. The first 10 enumerate natural rights that are unalienable. Except for the 2nd Amendment, few people are seriously talking about repealing any of the Bill of Rights amendments and it is highly unlikely that 38 states could agree to repeal of any of them, including the 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I do not believe that the core principles of the US Constitution would be at risk in a Constitutional convention. The other 17 may need to be reviewed and amended or repealed as necessary by a Constitutional convention and other amendments may need to be added to correct problems that Congress has refused to address.

I’ve reached the 15th Amendment. What could I possibly have against assuring the right to vote for all? I don’t. I do think that a comprehensive amendment that combines the 15th, 19th, the 23rd and 26th (acknowledging the natural right of all adult citizens to vote) might be a good idea. Clarifying what these mean in a single amendment might eliminate arguments over voting rights. The discussion would at least help clarify it for our generation.

Many conservatives fear that an Article V convention would seek to eliminate of the Electoral College which would (not might, but would) lead to a tyranny of the majority whereby big cities and large-population states determine ALWAYS who will be president. That is an extremely dangerous situation that our Founders recognized and sought to prevent. I’m going to reiterate that Article V can only be used for states to apply for a limited-subject convention and that the delegates can only make recommendations for amendments other than the one the convention was called for, so there is no chance of a convention called to discuss a balanced budget somehow reforming the Electoral College because 38 sets of state legislative bodies would have ratify such an amendment.

Just spit balling, though — If anything, looking at the red-blue map, the Electoral College should be reformed to reflect regional rather than state population distribution because far too often national politics are dominated by large cities, disenfranchising suburban and rural voters, a situation the majority of our Founders would have opposed. The Founders designed the federal system the way that they did so that the large population centers would not be able to tyrannize the rural areas. Don’t believe me – read the Convention notes. They’re available online.

What's Your Opinion?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

The Libertarian Ideal

Voice, Exit and Post-Libertarianism


Social trends, economics, health and other depressing topics!

My Corner

A Blog Showcasing My Writing and Me

The Return of the Modern Philosopher

Deep Thoughts from the Shallow End of the Pool

Steven Smith

The website of an aspiring author


a voracious reader. | a book blogger.


adventure, art, nature, travel, photography, wildlife - animals, and funny stuff


The Peaceful Revolution Liberate Main Street

%d bloggers like this: