Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TheBattman

On May 12, 1912, the Seventeenth Amendment, providing for direct popular election of the Senate, was approved by the Congress; the requisite three-fourths of the state legislatures ratified it in less than eleven months. Not only was it ratified quickly, but it was also ratified by overwhelming numbers. In fifty-two of the seventy-two state legislative chambers that voted to ratify the Seventeenth Amendment, the vote was unanimous, and in all thirty-six of the ratifying states the total number of votes cast in opposition to ratification was only 191, with 152 of these votes coming from the lower chambers of Vermont and Connecticut.

- From Heritage.org
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/17/essays/178/popular-election-of-senators


19 posted on 05/30/2012 9:37:16 AM PDT by skoobedoo (Mr. Obama - if you act presidential, I will call you Mr. President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: skoobedoo

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.


21 posted on 05/30/2012 4:27:15 PM PDT by H.Akston (Sandra Fluke is more like a looter than a slut. At least a slut gives something for what she takes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: skoobedoo

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


24 posted on 05/31/2012 8:00:26 AM PDT by TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: skoobedoo

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.


25 posted on 05/31/2012 8:05:59 AM PDT by TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson