Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- documents:answers:two_reasons_one_state_vote [2015/10/31 22:23] – ↷ Page moved from authoring:cospwiki:answers:two_reasons_one_state_vote to documents:answers:two_reasons_one_state_vote Oliver Wolcott
+++ documents:answers:two_reasons_one_state_vote [2016/06/07 00:02] – Oliver Wolcott
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <WRAP round download 60%>
-{{:authoring:cospwiki:answers:trying_to_abolish_the_convention_s_one-state-one-vote.pdf|PDF download}}
+{{:documents:trying_to_abolish_the_convention_s_one-stateone-vote_rule_not_on.pdf|PDF download}}
 </WRAP>
 ======Trying to Abolish the Convention’s One-State/One-Vote Rule Not Only Would Be Unconstitutional—It Wouldn’t Be Worth Trying======
-February 6, 2015 by [[http://constitution.i2i.org/author/robnatelson/|Rob Natelson]]
+February 6, 2015 by [[https://www.i2i.org/trying-to-abolishing-the-conventions-one-stateone-vote-rule-not-only-would-be-unconstitutional-it-wouldnt-be-worth-trying/|(Source)]]
-[[http://constitution.i2i.org/2015/02/06/trying-to-abolishing-the-convention’s-one-stateone-vote-rule-not-only-would-be-unconstitutional—it-wouldn’t-be-worth-trying/|(Source)]]
+{{tag>application amendments Natelson Necessary_and_Proper_clause Article_1_Section_8_Clause_18 One_vote Delegate who_dominates}}
-{{:authoring:cospwiki:answers:natelson2.jpg?nolink&100|Natelson}}
+{{:documents:answers:natelson2.jpg?nolink&100|Natelson}}
 One of the far-fetched arguments used to persuade conservatives to oppose an amendments convention is that if 34 states apply, a left-wing Congress might try to dictate that commissioners (delegates) be allocated by population rather than by one state/one vote.
@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 [[http://constitution.i2i.org/2015/02/06/trying-to-abolishing-the-convention’s-one-stateone-vote-rule-not-only-would-be-unconstitutional—it-wouldn’t-be-worth-trying/|Source]]
-{{tag>application amendments Natelson Necessary_and_Proper One_vote Delegate who_dominates}}