founding fathers clearly didn't intend to include Indians in that population because they were considered separate from the "population". I don't see anything that defines "population" as anyone within our borders when counted by the census (and clearly Indians were within those borders), so I'm not sure why you seem so adamant that the Constitution would need to be amended. We've had different apportionment methods in the past.

Regardless, the GOP has and will portray this as "Dems want to give Congressional representation, and funding, based on counting illegals. And that's why they want more illegals allowed in." Do you seriously want to go to voters and say "hey, that's what we say the Constitution means, so pound sand until you amend it." Even if you are right, and that holds up to judicial scrutiny (which would surprise me, but I'm certainly no lawyer), do you really want to be the party arguing that to voters? Shoot, do you even think that's the right thing to do, in that you would defend this move to prevent it getting fixed? I will presume not, since you admit you would support the amendment.