A computer simulation model tested the importance of several factors impacting the ratification of Constitutional amendments in the United States. Through sensitivity testing, two factors —the distribution of national opinion for approving an amendment across small and large states, and decision rules pertaining to the proportion of states required to ratify an amendment-were found to be significant. Two other factors —the time period used (which reflected various ratios of population differences between large and small states) and the weighting of state votes by state population -were not significant in determining the number of amendments ratified. The model implies that decision rules and public opinion, rather than state population differences "drive" the constitutional amendment ratification process.
AMES, H. V.
(1896). The proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States during the first century of its history (H. Doc. 353, pt. 2, 54th Congress, 2nd sess.). Washington, DC: U. S. Congress, House of Representatives.
2.
Balch, S. H.
(1980). Amending the U.S. Constitution: The view from New York. State Government, 53(2), 103-107.
3.
Balog, F.
(1982). Popular sovereignty and the question of the limited constitutional convention. Cooley Law Review, 1, 1-104.
4.
Bryce, Lord J.
(1888). The American commonwealth, Vol. 1. London & New York: Macmillan.
5.
Burgess, J. M.
(1890). Political science and comparative constitutional law, Vol. 1. Boston: Ginn.
6.
Cooke, E. F.
(1984). A detailed analysis of the Constitution. (5th ed.). Totowa, NJ: Uttlefleld, Adams.
7.
Dellinger, W
(1986). The process of constitutional amendment: Law, history, and politics. News for Teachers of Political Science, 49, 16-19.
8.
Francis, W. L.
(1970). Simulation of committee decision making in a state legislative body. Simulation & Games, 1, 235-262.
9.
Gullahorn, J. E.
, & Gullahorn, J. T. (1970). Simulation and social science theory: The state of the union. Simulation & Games, 1, 21-26.
10.
Kyvig, D. E.
(1986). Alternative to revolution. Two hundred years of constitutional amending. In A. H. Gundman (Ed.), The embattled Constitution: Vitalframework or convenient symbol. Malibar, FL: Krieger.
11.
Livingston, W. S.
(1956). Federalism and constitutional change. Oxford: Clarendon.
12.
Merriam, C. E.
(1920). American political ideas: Studies in the development of American political thought, 1865-1917. New York: Macmillan.
13.
Pool, I. de Sola
, & Kessler, A. (1968). The kaiser, the tsar, and the computer: Information processing in a crisis. American Behavioral Scientist, 8, 31-38.
14.
Pool, I. de Sola
, Abelson, R. P., & Popkin, S. L. (1965). A postscript on the 1964 election. American Behavioral Scientist, 5, 39-44.
15.
Rossiter, W. S.
(1909). A century of population growth in the United States, 1700-1900. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
16.
Schechter, S. L.
(1985). Amending the U.S. Constitution: A new generation on trial. In K. G. Banting, & R. Simeon (Eds.), Redesigning the state: The politics of constitutional change. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
17.
Shapiro, M. J.
(1968). The house and the federal role: A computer simulation of roll-call voting. American Political Science Review, 62, 494-517.
18.
Sigelman, L.
, & Dometrius, N. C. (1986). Organizational regeneration: A model with applications to affirmative action. American Journal of Political Science, 30, 79-107.
19.
Sigelman, L.
, & Whicker, M. L. (1987). Some implications of bias in peer review: Asimulation-based analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 68, 494-509.
20.
Smith, J. A.
(1907). The spirit of American government. New York: Macmillan.
21.
Vose, C. E.
(1972). Constitutional change: Amendment politics and Supreme Court litigation since 1900. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
22.
Wechsler, H.
(1980). Introductory remarks at the American Philosophical Society. In The Revolution, the Constitution, and America's third century, Vol. 1 (Bicentennial Conference of the United States Constitution). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
23.
Whicker, M. L.
(1986). Direct democracy devices: A computer simulation analysis. Journal of Policy and Modeling, 8, 255-272.
24.
Whicker, M. L.
, & Moore, R. A. (1988). The presidential item veto: A computer simulation model. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 15, 143-156.
25.
Whicker, M. L.
, & Strickland, R. A. (1988). A computer simulation of legislative voting in presidential and parliamentary systems: A comparison of the U.S. and British systems. Southeastern Political Review, 16, 115-135.
26.
Wilson, W.
(1885). Congressional government: A study in American politics. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
27.
Yeager, R. F.
(1979). Rationality and retrenchment: The use of a computer simulation to aid decision making in school closings. Education and Urban Sociology, 11, 293-312.
