[Publius]

Since the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress to propose an amendment, Senate proponents of the measure need 67 votes, a number they seemed unlikely to muster, at least this year.

Not completely true. The Constitution provides another method for proposing amendments.

”A Convention for Proposing Amendments…as Part of This Constitution”

[Jack Black]

Terrible Idea. It will be hijacked and the 2nd will be removed.

[Wampus SC]

”A Convention for Proposing Amendments…as Part of This Constitution”

Not a good idea. The last time a convention for amending happened, we got a complete rewrite. We lucked out, since the present Constitution is an improvement over the Articles of Confederation in many ways. But there are no guarantees of what would come out of a Constitutional Convention. We might lose the 1st, or 2nd, or 10th Amendment, for example.

There's no guarantee that there would be any provision for giving the states a chance to ratify or reject it.

It's not a good idea. Trying to amend the present Constitution is much better, even if it has to be tried repeatedly.