Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence

[onenote]

126. Let me try, again, to explain

I in no way intended to suggest that I believe in a constitutional system and you don't. What I was saying, and I apologize if it wasn't clear to you, that I believe in "a constitutional system that that has worked well, albeit slowly at times", meaning that I believe in the particular constitutional system, including the slow moving, difficult process for changing it, that we have now, whereas, and I apologize if I've misread your position, you want to replace our current constitutional scheme with a fundamentally different constitutional system in which, among other things, the role of states in allocating political power would be diminished or eliminated. Presumably this would include changing the Senate so that it no longer is a 2 per state body, by changing the way the number of seats are allocated in the House, by eliminating the electoral college, and, presumably by getting rid of the provision that requires the support of 3/4 of the states to effectuate change in the constitutional system.

I think some of those changes, particularly replacing the EC with direct popular vote election of the President are overdue. (I also think the allocation methodology for the House needs to be reformed). But I recognize that the same factors that have made it difficult of those who would roll back our freedoms to amend the Constitution also make the process of achieving the changes I support difficult.

What I'm still trying to sort out, and I'm sincere in my request that you help me understand, is how you propose to get from where we are now to what I understand to be where you think we should get? Given that changing the requirement for a 3/4 vote of the states to amend the Constitutional requirement that 3/4 of the states support an amendment, and the further obstacles that raises to the other changes you want, it seems like you must be proposing not merely a revision of our existing constitution but some means of dispensing with it entirely and replacing it. So I ask, how do you think we get from here to there? And do you really think the odds are better that we can get from where we are now to where you want by somehow getting rid of and replacing our current constitutional system with a new version than they are of making incremental changes to our current constitutional system through amendments?

PS - in order to minimize the likelihood of anyone else being confused, I've edited the first sentence of my previous post to make it state more clearly what I intended.