[WS:] An excellent point, indeed. But I do not think that the problem is limited to the Constitution. The Constitution is but a piece of paper if there is no political will to enforce it. An I find it difficult to believe that 89% of the population producing 90% of GDP could not find a way of shedding 18th century constraints on it productive potential. That is, if that 89 % were unanimous.
This brings us to the point that I've been trying to argue for some time - that is is the nature of party politics in the U, not the minority rule, that derails any rational policy. Or rather rational policy for the nation as a whole, rather than rational for the preservation of narrow partisan interests. It is not just Repugs who do it, but Dems as well, because given the nature of between-party competition, that is the only rational thing to do (EE Schattnschneider argues that quite eloquently in his book "The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America" ).
In other words, it is not the Constitution or the 21 or so "piss-ant states" producing 10% of the GDP that is the problem, but rather modern political party politics that uses the rights given to those 21 piss-ant states some 200 years ago to pursue their partisan interests at the expense of the nation as a whole. Obviously, it is not just the political party apparatus, but their industrial backers as well. But those industrial backers are located in "blue" states - they merely use the 21 piss-ant states as a tool in the pursuit of their narrow special interests.
Wojtek
2010/9/27 Mark Wain <wtkh at comcast.net>:
> Structure of Excuses
>
> By PAUL KRUGMAN
> “Structural” unemployment is a fake problem, which mainly serves as an
> excuse for not pursuing real solutions.
> http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/opinion/27krugman.html?sort=oldest&offset=3
>
> A Comment by 52. Old Curmudgeon Akron, OH September 27th, 2010 11:06 am
>
> If Dr. Krugman is beginning to sound shrill about this oft-repeated point,
> he has reasons. First, he's right about the substance; demand is the
> problem. All of a sudden, a nation whose government and consumers lived on
> credit cards for thirty years wants to shed debt. So no one wants to buy.
> That's why there's a huge job deficit. And a big-enough stimulus could do
> double duty by repairing and improving our dilapidated infrastructure. It
> might even help start new industries.
>
> But the second reason why Dr. Krugman sounds shrill has nothing to do with
> economics. So it's nothing an economist (even a Nobel Prize winner) can
> cure. That's the "political will" part.
>
> If it were up to the so-called "blue" states, which produce the vast
> majority of the nation's GDP, we would have more stimulus in a heartbeat.
> But the "red" states have "equal suffrage" in the Senate (to use our
> Constitution's term), despite the fact that nearly all of them (except for
> Texas and Florida) have minuscule populations and make minuscule
> contributions to GDP. Our twenty-one smallest states can mount a filibuster,
> despite the fact that, all together, they account for less than 11% of our
> people and about 10.2% of GDP.
>
> Furthermore, there is nothing anyone can do about it. Our Constitution
> (Article V) provides that "no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived
> of its equal Suffrage in the Senate." In other words, it is designed to let
> the few govern the many and the (economically) weak govern the strong. And
> it precludes anyone from changing this dismal arrangement, even by
> constitutional amendment, unless the small states concur.
>
> When you add the fact that the GOP now uses the mere threat of a filibuster
> as a means to stop every Democratic initiative dead in its tracks, you begin
> to sense the source of Dr. Krugman's frustration.
>
> So the problem is indeed structural. But the structural impediment is
> political, not economic. Our big industrial states provide the vast bulk of
> jobs and could employ the jobless easily with proper stimulus. But our
> Constitution has them roped and hog-tied. No other democracy---not
> Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Japan, India, New Zealand,
> South Korea or even Russia---has such a structural impediment to rational
> policy.
>
> Aside from a miraculous epiphany on the part of voters and senators from
> places like South Carolina, there are no short-term solutions save massive
> economic pressure, secession or another civil war. In the long run,
> immigration into, development of, and demographic changes in the obstructive
> states might do the trick. But as the great economist John Maynard Keynes
> once said, in the long run we are all dead.
>
> Welcome to the Banana Republic of America.
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>