Hacker News Reader

Comment by jquery | Hacker News Reader

I’ve seen good arguments that the Senate violates equal protection under the Constitution and should be reformed on that basis. Keep the Senate around with its 6 year and 2/2/2 staggered terms but give Texas and California more Senators than North and South Dakota.

View on HN

Violates the constitution? I’m not a constitutional scholar, but that sounds like a ridiculous argument. Article 1, section 3: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State…”

The 14th amendment introduces “equal protection,” speaks specifically about representation, and says nothing about changing the makeup of the senate.

(Edit: And even if it did, the 17th amendment restates that each state gets two senators, and would supersede the 14th.)

I am Dutch / European and do not understand why change/amendments of the constitution is not generally acceptable/attractive by the US population.

Surely societal change must and does change the efficacy and context of law over time?

They are acceptable (we have 27), the problem is the high bar to enacting one. With our hyper-partisan two-party system, it’s really hard to get anything done. Even basic legislation like the annual budget frequently stalls and we shut down the federal government while Congress pulls its proverbial head out of its arse.

They are. But the super-majority at multiple levels required to do so make them a non-starter for the petty "give my team an edge" and "force the states that aren't on my team to act like the ones that are" stuff everyone wants to use them for.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com