Posted on 04/08/2015 11:33:33 AM PDT by Jacquerie
Some men saw what was coming.
Coincident with ratification of the 17th Amendment to the constitution, New York Senator Elihu Root expressed his concerns in a series of lectures at the alma mater of James Madison, Princeton University. He was one of the most respected and influential politicians of the early 20th century. Senator Root spoke freely, without hesitation, the language of our framing generation. As a tidal wave of progressivism swept across America, he clearly feared our overnight transformation from a federal, to a democratic republic.
Senator Elihu Root: The Proper Pace of Political Change. (Excerpts):
In this country we have set forth in the Declaration of Independence the principles which we consider to lie at the basis of civil society: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving just powers from the consent of the governed.”
In our federal and state constitutions we have established the institutions through which these rights are to be secured. We have declared what officers shall make the laws, what officers shall execute them, what officers shall sit in judgment upon claims of right under them. We have prescribed how these officers shall be selected and the tenure by which they shall hold their offices. We have limited them in the powers which they are to exercise, and, where it has been deemed necessary, we have imposed specific duties upon them. The body of rules thus prescribed constitute the governmental institutions of the United States.
When proposals are made to change these institutions there are certain general considerations which should be observed.
The first consideration is that free government is impossible except through prescribed and established governmental institutions which work out the ends of government through many separate human agents, each doing his part in obedience to law. Popular will cannot execute itself directly except through a mob. Popular will cannot get itself executed through an irresponsible executive, for that is simple autocracy. An executive limited only by the direct expression of popular will cannot be held to responsibility against his will, because, having possession of all the powers of government, he can prevent any true, free, and general expression adverse to himself, and unless he yields voluntarily he can be overturned only by a revolution.
The familiar Spanish-American dictatorships are illustrations of this. A tyrant once established by what is, or is alleged to be, public choice never permits an expression of public will which will displace him, and he goes out only through a new revolution because he alone controls the machinery through he could be displaced.
We should therefore, reject every proposal which involves the idea that the people can rule merely by voting, or merely by voting and having one man or group of men to execute their will.
A second consideration is that, in estimating the value of any system of governmental institutions, due regard must be had to the true functions of government and to the limitations imposed by nature upon what it is possible for government to accomplish. We all know of course that we cannot abolish all the evils in this world by statute or by the enforcement of statutes, nor can we prevent the inexorable law of nature which decrees that suffering shall follow vice and all the evil passions and folly of mankind.
Law cannot give to depravity the rewards of virtue, to indolence the rewards of industry, to indifference the rewards of ambition, or to ignorance the rewards of learning. The utmost that government can do is measurably to protect men, not against the wrong done they do themselves but against wrong done by others, and to promote the long, slow process of educating mind and character to a better knowledge and nobler standards of life and conduct . . .
The chief motive power which has moved mankind along the course of development which we call the progress of civilization has been the sum total of intelligent selfishness in a vast number of individuals, each working for his own support, his own gain, his own betterment. It is that which has cleared the forests and cultivated the fields and built the ships and railroads, made discoveries and inventions, covered the earth with commerce, softened by intercourse the enmities of nations and races, and made possible the wonders of literature and art . . .
But the complete control of such motives will be the millennium. Any attempt to enforce a millennial standard now by law must necessarily fail, and any judgment which assumes government’s responsibility to enforce such a standard must be an unjust judgment. Indeed, no such standard can ever be forced. It must come, not by superior force but from the changed nature of man, . . .
A third consideration is that it is not merely useless but injurious for government to attempt too much. It is manifest that to enable it to deal with the new conditions I have described we must invest government with authority to interfere with the individual conduct of the citizen to a degree hitherto unknown in this country. When government undertakes to give the individual citizen protection by regulating the conduct of others toward him in the field where formerly he protected himself by his freedom of contracts, it is limiting the liberty of the citizen whose conduct is regulated and taking a step in the direction of paternal government. Interference with individual liberty by government should be jealously watched and restrained, because the habit of undue interference destroys that independence of character without which in its citizens no free government can endure . . .
The habit of undue interference by government in private affairs breeds the habit of undue reliance upon government in private affairs at the expense of individual initiative, energy, enterprise, courage, independent manhood.
The strength of self-government and the motive power of progress must be found in the characters of the individual citizens who make up a nation. Weaken individual character among a people by comfortable reliance upon paternal government and a nation soon becomes incapable of free self-government and fit only to be ruled. The higher and nobler qualities of national life that make for ideals and effort and achievement become atrophied and the nation is decadent.
The recognition of shortcomings or inconveniences in government is not by itself sufficient to warrant a change of system. There should be also an effort to estimate and compare the shortcomings and inconveniences of the system to be substituted, for although they may be different they will certainly exist.
In the nature of things all government must be imperfect because men are imperfect. Every system has its shortcomings and inconveniences; and these are seen and felt as they exist in the system under which we live, while the shortcomings and inconveniences of other systems are forgotten or ignored.
The source for my post is a book that rests a few feet away, Volume 13 of The Annals of America.
Ah yes, the Annals of America. We purchased this with our encyclopedia Britannica over 20 years ago when we first began home-schooling. The encyclopedia is long gone. But the Annals are still on our shelves, and still used as a reference. Probably the best, most useful, most informative book purchase I ever made.
Thanks for posting this.
I must admit that I have a limited understanding of exactly how the 17th amendment tipped the balance of power away from the States and in favor of the Federal Government. I don’t think I’m alone here. All I know is that somehow the 17th did this.
It might be helpful if you or someone posts a very brief outline of “How things worked” before the 17th and “How they work now”.
Thanks again.
Would you please post your links to the various ArticleV/17A references to Zenata?
Thanks.
To Zenata,
Here is a post that may help.
Hi Zenata, Lots of info here. The Ulysess at the Mast article is a great one on the 17th. I'm still studying the links and learn something every time I look at them. Enjoy!
"According to Article I, section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, senators were to be chosen by the legislatures of their respective states. The 17th Amendment to the Constitution, however, dictates that senators are to be directly elected by the people they represent."
For those who think the Article V process is too risky, I ask, "What other options do you see?"
To summarize from a previous post by Grace G, I see it as:
1. Elect More Republicans - Failed due to RINO/Uni-party confluence.
2. Article V Convention of States to propose Amendments - Needed to try to take power from the federal government back to the states and reel in the the federal leviathan.
3. State Nullification - Last ditch effort to try to take power back from the federal monster, though by this point it may be too late.
4. State Secession - Could either end up peaceably like the breakup of the Czechoslovakia in 1993 or a brutal:
5. Civil War II like the first one.... The longer we wait on #2, the more likely #3, then #4 and finally #5. .
Quick review: We need 34 states to pass an application, then Congress shall, by law, call a Convention of States as soon as it receives applications from 2/3 of the State Legislatures. That's 34 states. We now have 30 working on it. Amendments are proposed and voted on at the convention. Each Amendment must be ratified by ¾ of the states in order to become part of the US Constitution. That’s 38 states. “There are far more political and legal constraints on a runaway convention than on a runaway Congress.” - Robert Natelson
Most FReepers are aware of these links, but I post anyway for review and for people new to Article V. It is our responsibility to make Article V the most understood aspect of the US Constitution.
****Please see this summary video from Alabama first: Convention of States - Alabama Way to go Alabama! A great introduction!
Rep. Bill Taylor introduces a Convention of States
The Case for an Article V Convention. Great explanation of an Article V convention to the Massachusetts State Legislature.
**** Convention of States Lots of information here.
Call a Convention A call for a Convention of States
Article V Project to Restore Liberty Another good source.
Convention of States model Resolution
A Summary of Mark Levin’s Proposed Amendments by Jacquerie
Chapter 1 of Mark Levin’s Book, The Liberty Amendments
Mark Levin, Constitution Article V, and the Liberty Amendments
Mark Levin: “The Liberty Amendments” - Complete Sean Hannity Special + other Links
List of Mark Levin You Tube Videos
Mark Levin Article V, Liberty Amendments youtube video hub
Three hour video of C-Span interview with Mark Levin
*** Mark Levin’s ALEC Speech, Dec 4, 2014
Gaining Steam? Nearly 100 Lawmakers Descend on Mount Vernon to Talk Convention of States The beginning.
Mark Levin’s “Liberty Amendments” Sean Hannity Special
We can fight the uniparty! States, the Natural Second Party by Jacquerie
Convention to Propose Amendments to the United States Constitution
The Other Way to Amend the Constitution: The Article V Constitutional Convention Amendment Process
Friends of Article V Convention Links
Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention:
Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention. (Part I)
Congress’ Present Duty to Call a convention. (Part II)
Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention. (Part III)
Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention. (Part IV)
Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention. (Part V)
Congress’ Failure to Call an Amendments Convention. (Part VI)
Ulysses at the Mast: Democracy, Federalism, and the Sirens' Song of the Seventeenth Amendment by Jay Bybee. Repeal the 17th. Shorter Abstract here: Ulysses at the Mast, one page Abstract
****For those of you that still have doubts about the Article V process, please review: Responses To Convention Of States Opposition My initial concerns were resolved after reading these articles. My attitude now is Go For It!
Update: Convention of States by the numbers The current State count
Article V Handbook - for State Legislators An important resource.
**** State Legislators Article V Caucus State Legislators, Join up at this site!
Most State Legislatures are in session now. Send this list of links to your State Representatives and Senators here: Contact your State Legislators.
Sample Letter to state Representatives regarding the Convention of States Project and also, Talking Points.
Excellent Article V Letter to a State Assemblyman by Jacquerie
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke.
Let’s all work together to get this going.
Art,
I thank you for your reply.
I’ll look at and consider the information but right now I need to watch the Washington Caps Hockey game.
I will be back.
You’re welcome Zeneta. Enjoy the game!
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.