Posted on 04/28/2017 4:37:16 PM PDT by nesnah
Think about this for a minute.
The 17th was about having state governments have a voice in Washington for legislation to protect the states' interest in reigning in central powers. The 17th took control of selecting Senators from the state's legislative body and gave it to the masses (democracy in action).
As it stands today, there are 32 Republican-controlled state legislatures. This would presumably translate into 64 Pubbie seats, likely more conservative and 10th Amendment-conscious than the corrupt, treasonous bastards we have now in both parties.
Throw in 6 more split legislatures, and we likely get 6 more from that; a total of 70 seats.
The Congress would be a different place. Oh, the good old days.....
Comments?
Yes, we need to repeal this amendment. In other conversations here on FR I’ve been told that some states actually allowed voting for senators prior to the 17th passing. So we need a repeal that also specifies state legislatures SHALL appoint senators to correct the imbalance caused by states not looking out for their own interests by appointing an appropriate agent.
After the 19th Amendment, the 17th is THE WORST!
It was the beginning of the end of our Republic.
The USC recognizes 3 (and only 3) entities: The Federal Government, the States and the People. Before the 17th, all had equal say in our governance: Fed=Exec+Courts, People=House, States=Senate.
After the 17th the States became an afterthought.
The sheeple aren't that stupid, especially when it comes to keeping the gravy train running along.
Start a repeal the 17th movement.
Not only would Congress would be a different place, but there would probably be several different faces on the Supreme Court.
Note that the Founding States established the Senate partly to kill unconstitutional House appropriations bills (1.7.1), bills that not only steal state powers, but that also steal state revenues uniquely associated with those powers.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
But since the ratification of the ill-conceived 17th Amendment, the corrupt Senate now not only helps the likewise corrupt House to pass unconstitutional appropriations bills, but the Senate then approves state sovereignty-ignoring activist Supreme Court justices that declare the unconstitutional laws that the Senate helps the House to pass to be constitutional, Obamacare a great example.
What a mess! :^(
Drain the swamp! Drain the swamp!
Remember in November ’18 !
Since Trump entered the ’16 presidential race too late for patriots to make sure that there were state sovereignty-respecting candidates on the primary ballots, patriots need make sure that such candidates are on the ’18 primary ballots so that they can be elected to support Trump in draining the unconstitutionally big federal government swamp.
Such a Congress will also be able to finish draining the swamp with respect to getting the remaining state sovereignty-ignoring, activist Supreme Court justices off of the bench.
In fact, if Justice Gorsuch turns out to be a liberal Trojan Horse then we will need 67 patriot senators to remove a House-impeached Gorsuch from office.
Noting that the primaries start in Iowa and New Hampshire in February ‘18, patriots need to challenge candidates for federal office in the following way.
While I Googled the primary information above concerning Iowa and New Hampshire, FReeper iowamark brought to my attention that the February primaries for these states apply only to presidential election years. And after doing some more scratching, since primary dates for most states for 2018 elections probably haven’t been uploaded at this time (March 14, 2017), FReepers will need to find out primary dates from sources and / or websites in their own states.
Patriots need to qualify candidates by asking them why the Founding States made the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I; to limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers.
Patriots also need to find candidates that are knowledgeable of the Supreme Court's clarifications of the federal government’s limited powers listed above.
Woody Wilson.
Amen!
That is what the communists (”progressives”) wanted, and they got their easy.
Thanks for this great post.
Remember the 17th amendment as an example of feel good populism (like often flamed up by a “community organizer”) negating American Genius (esp with regard to limiting government). What a treasonous travesty!
We are always at risk for this treason if We the People are not assimilated enough to Orthodox Americanism to reject all the stupid violent things that our real American forefathers could see right through.
Orthodox Americanism: It’s what’s good for the world! (Oh, yeah, that’s been my tagline for years!)
Orthodox Americanism: love it, learn it, propagate it, protect it! It is a good thing that is the opposite of the fascist/communist/socialist/Islamist (all basically the same) governments that killed maybe 260 million people in the 20th century. No one should be ashamed to promote Orthodox Americanism, even if you think you have to call it something else.
It’s good, it’s just, it works, (and it’s even our heritage!), Go America!
It’s hard to say which is the worst amendment. I mean the 16th has got to be right in there with the worst.
Need an Article 5 Convention for that to ever happen.
You will never get Congress to initiate that move.
Democracy sucks! The Framers knew perfectly well that EVERY attempt at democratic government throughout history failed, miserably.
The Constitution gives a nod to democracy by allowing citizens to appoint their own representatives to the House. That was ALL the democracy they allowed.
The Senate was meant to provide DIRECT representation to the States, so they could look out for their own interests. The 17th, however, takes away the voice of the States and gives it to the howling mob.
“Popular” elections for Senate seats are now dominated by out-of-state money, since a Senate vote today affects much more than merely State interests. And the several States have nobody in Washington looking out for purely State interests. Pass a bill that dumps huge costs onto one or more (or all) of the States? Sure!
DUMP THE 17th AMENDMENT!!!
>>It’s hard to say which is the worst amendment. I mean the 16th has got to be right in there with the worst.<<
Still going with the 19th but the 16th is up there with the 18th. What were they thinking?
Three pivotal events are the root of government corruption.
The creation of the Federal Reserve.
The 16th Amendment.
The Constitution taxed states instead of people. The census determines the amount of tax the state must collect. If the Congress added$100 million expenditure and the census counted 100 million people then each state would collect $1 from each citizen.
The 17th Amendment.
Large and small states agreed to the Great Compromise of 1787 that retained the bicameral legislature.
The voters elect their Representatives directly because the House represented the voters in their district.
The state legislators elected the Senators because they represented the state.
Seriously, how does one improve that?
Back in the early ‘00s, we used to argue about this quite frequently.
With justification, a thoughtful and historically literate Freeper at the time argued that state legislatures were notoriously corrupt by turn of century so there was legitimate need for reform at the state level. I don’t doubt it, although my view was always that it’s up to the states to decide.
My the biggest problem w/ the 17th is that it forces all states into direct election of Senators. A majority of states had moved that way by the time of the adoption of the Amendment which is why it so easily passed, but it didn’t have to be that way. The progressive instinct is to force its poisons upon the rest.
In addition to what you and others here have posted about the erosion of state powers as a result of the 17th, I am equally concerned that the 17th has removed the relationship between citizens and their state governments, which has concentrated state power in well organized, minority movements and political organizations. Most state legislatures represent dominant state-wide political affiliation, yes, but the 17th has moved policy to the extremes as state-wide organizations only need a majority of a minority to control legislatures and thereby garner motivated extremes to keep themselves in power.
California is case in point, as is my home county of Arlington, VA. With no viable Republican opposition here in Arlington, the Democrats fight for the hard left since they don’t need any Republican votes to win, and the political arguments here are between left of Mao vs even more left of Mao. Worse, it allows these politicians to pick and choose constituent groups without electoral consequence, thus illegals often have more voice here than citizens.
Most voters only bother with local elections during the national election cycles. Since the legislatures no longer determine national political outcomes, voters make no connection between their in-state and Senate votes. The 17th amendment has destroyed majority rule in the states.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.