Posted on 05/29/2012 7:37:58 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The success of the 17th Amendment proved that the reasons for it were bogus - insensitivity of the state legislatures to public opinion. If they were insensitive, they’d have never ratified it. It was an unnecessary amendment that just makes America more like France.
Keep singing that tune when Washington imposes a sales tax on the internet on top of regulations of the internet.
At the very least you should embrace your right to vote with your feet and buy from intrastate industry free of both regulation and Taxes. A right that should not be underestimated or understated.
I honestly Feel that States will inevitably have to impose sales tax on internet commerce as it comes to replace “brick and mortar” commerce.
In my opinion This should either be at the point of sale, or the point of aquation.
1. Elimination of 33 of the most expensive elections that occur every two years. That's a continuous cash flow to the MSM.
2. If there is going to be cronyism, I'd rather it be contained within the state. Why have Chuck Schumer calling the shots in New York for all the Senate seats in other states?
-PJ
Yes, I understand the “leanings” of this particular writer/site - but I have yet to find any evidence that shows otherwise than what is stated regarding the ratification votes (The actual exposition on the 17th Amendment and the ratification procedure follows an extended rant regarding the confirmation of a certain extremist and distasteful Supreme Court justice).
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd522.htm
OH - and thanks for posting that. I was familiar with that bit of “quick passage”, yet I can find few so-called “legit” sources that actually dive in to the ratification process - including states that “ratified”, yet their legislature was not in session, nor did it meet in special session for the purpose. Others that were listed as ratifying the amendment at the time declared to be passed, actually didn’t vote on it until some time after. Lots of questions.
Further - what brought about the supposed “need” for direct election of Senators? I know of the extreme corruption in some states (Nevada and California being hotbeds at the time) where Senate seats were essentially bought. My understanding of the Founding Father’s intent - the Senate was to be a check within the legislative branch.
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.