Please correct me if I am wrong here: The Constitution requires 2/3 vote to propose and then 3/4 vote to ratify by both houses of the U.S. Congress to pass an amendment to the Constitution. The Congress would never get that level of agreement for an amendment that reduces Congress’ (or a congressman’s) personal power vis-a-vis the states. On the other hand, under the Constitution the states also have a defined method to amend the U.S. Constitution. This is one of the balances of power that the founders and framers of the U.S. put into the U.S. Constitution, and they made the bar very high. Other than this, the Constitution can easily be read as a recipe for an imperial oligarchy. In regard to the balance of power between the federal government and the states, the states can be expected to and would propose and then ratify by 3/4 vote Constitutional amendments that would increase their states’ powers and the individual state legislator’s powers vis-a-vis the federal government. This is one of the those times to re-balance the relative power of government versus the people in all civilized countries, not only the U.S. This is one of those times when the technological society (including the technologies of management and administration and the technologies of propaganda and education) has been used successfully against the people to diminish the people’s power. This is one of those times to move toward democracy and away from centralized governments in all civilized countries. (see painting: The Forgotten Man, by Jon McNaughton.)

http://jonmcnaughton.com/content/ZoomDetailPages/TheForgottenMan.html