Free Republic

"Those gentlemen, who will be elected senators, will fix themselves in the federal town, and become citizens of that town more than of your state." --George Mason, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788

With the Autumnal Equinox now behind us, We, the People of Massachusetts, are reminded that in less than a month’s time we’ll be called upon to elect (or re-elect) a Senator to represent our interests in the upper house of the United States Congress. T’was not always thus. Those among my readers who stayed awake during Mrs. McGuffey’s 9th Grade History class will recall that, until the 2nd decade of the 20th Century, U.S. Senators were (per Art. 1, Sec. 3 of the Constitution) chosen by state legislatures, not elected directly by the people as at present. The most contentious issue facing the...

America, weÂ’re told from a young age, is all about democracy, and democracy is all about choosing whom you want to be your representatives and holding them accountable. This seems like an entirely uncontroversial idea, but a surprising number of Republican politicians would like to do away with this right, and return the country to an older era when Americans didnÂ’t directly elect their representatives in Washington.Until 1913 and the ratification of the 17th Amendment, Americans didnÂ’t actually elect senators, state legislators did. The change seems unquestionably positive, but Rep. Jeff Flake, the front-runner for the Republican nomination for a...

Not thinking anyone is surprised about This but CNN is reporting that: Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, became the second Republican senator not involved in negotiating a bipartisan background check measure to say she will support it, according to a statement Sunday. She described the bill as a responsible compromise between two senators - Sens. Pat Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, and Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia - who have strong ratings from the National Rifle Association. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Illinois, has indicated his support for the deal.

Mark Levin opened his show tonight saying that a certain Republican Congressman who doesn’t like what he’s saying is trying to get the local affiliate in their district to stop running the Mark Levin Show. And apparently they are trying to do it behind the scenes. But Levin says EVERYTHING gets back to him and he will not tolerate fascism. He gives this unnamed Republican Congressman a warning below noting that if they succeed in getting him silenced, he will expose them: Click excerpt link for audio!

Mark is working on another book. Every night it seems, he wants to bust out and talk about it, but his publishers have put the ixnay on too much disclosure. Still, he shows a little leg now and then. That happened in the second hour of his show last Thursday, April 11, 2013. With the help of sixteen rinos, Dingy Harry got 68 votes to proceed with a gun control bill that few, if any Senators had read. After wailing on the lack of process and regular order, Mark focused on the nature of the Senate and how it differed...

Happy Anniversary! Today marks one hundred years of the horrible 17th Amendment. Its Progressive purpose was to democratize the Senate, and boy, did it! In a complete about face from the philosophy, experience and warnings from the Framing generation, the States no longer participate in the federal government. One hundred years ago today, the republic ceased being federal, and overnight became a single un-confederated republic that spanned a continent. It also created a temporary, partial power vacuum, and set the stage for total consolidation of authority in the national government. Once State agency was removed, all that was left were...

Happy Anniversary. Today marks one hundred years of popularly elected Senators. Can’t you feel the democratic love? The 17th Amendment, which replaced State Legislatures as Senatorial electors with the general voting public, just doesn’t get the credit it deserves. Without it, Obama could not rule as the despot he is. Background. A wave of Populist/Progressive change began in earnest in the late 19th Century. Intellectuals such as Professor Woodrow Wilson rejected the Natural Law basis of our revolution and Declaration of Independence. Congress was too cumbersome, slow, restrictive and inattentive to the changing needs and demands of an emerging industrial...

Happy Anniversary! Today is the 100th Anniversary of the horrible 17th Amendment. In 1787-1788, Anti-Federalists warned that history’s lesson regarding republics would result in a despotic American government. Because republics rested on the will of the people, republics demanded among their communities a certain commonality of interests, traditions and morals. Absent commonality, society was certain to disintegrate into warring factions bent on besting and oppressing each other. Only an authoritarian government of force could keep the peace and control these hostile groups. Government could be one or a few men at the top lording over the many, or it could...

Oh Happy Day! Today is the hundredth anniversary of the 17th Amendment!Lets Make a Deal. When consumers purchase goods, they expect the products to last. Everyone expects some durability to their purchases. Legislation is also a product. Retail consumers of Congressional law can only catch a glimpse at the give and take of brief public hearings and meager open debate. What we do not see is more important. An incredible amount of personal and monetary capital goes into major legislation. Various interest groups invest tremendous sums in lobbyists, polling, media, etc to get their pet interests passed by Congress. Within...

Happy Anniversary! Today marks 100 years of the 17th Amendment.To Freepers, our statist government is a daily “fingernails across the chalkboard” experience. What will the likes of Senators Schumer and Durbin or Representatives Hoyer, Lee and Pelosi try to pull next? Why did our national government morph from one designed to protect our freedoms into one that promises increasing oppression? More to the point, why did the federal government generally remain within its Constitutional bounds prior to WWI and not thereafter? Thank the 17th Amendment. It fundamentally altered the Constitution; it pulled the keystone from the arch of our Framers’...

Originally, although a Senator was elected by a state legislature, he was expected to represent the people of that state (rather than the legislature alone) in the Senate (See Federalist No. 62 through No.66).[Need quotation on talk to verify] Also it was believed that while an unqualified candidate might win a popular-vote majority through demagoguery or superficial qualities, the legislature, which could deliberate on its choice, and whose members had been selected by their constituents and had experience in politics, would be safe from such folly. Finally, election by the legislature was expected to insulate Senators from the distraction of...

After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the federal government announced that it would preempt all state jurisdiction over airport security. The federal government preempted state powers without regard to balancing federal and state responsibilities so that these responsibilities, and related costs, could be distributed across federal, state, and local governments. To carry out this preemption, the federal government recently reported that it will employ more than 47,000 federal recruits in the fight against terrorism as newly trained security screeners at 424 airports nationwide.

In our grubby, unhelpful political lexicon, certain words exist solely to end conversations. The most prominent such word is “racist.� Less popular, but by no means less potent, are “democracy� and “rights.� When welded together as “democratic rights,� the pair becomes all-powerful — strong enough to send grown men spinning for the exits and to render eloquent speakers mute.For a good example of this principle in motion, witness the orthodox reaction to anyone who calls for the repeal of the 17th Amendment. (Direct election of senators, if you’re wondering.) Removing this ugly violation from the Constitution it so corrupts...

One hundred years ago, the United States ratified an amendment to the Constitution that changed the way America chose its senators. The amendment's supporters said that senators directly elected by the people would not only be more democratic, but also less corrupt and less susceptible to special interest influence. Instead of reducing corruption, however, changing the method of Senate selection provided entirely new avenues of political exploitation by fundamentally transforming our federal government. Most importantly, the amendment destroyed the federalist structure that the Founding Fathers installed to protect state sovereignty. Today, members of the Georgia House of Representatives seek to...

It is a matter of public record that the United States Senate is a terrible place where serious policy issues are ignored; routine votes are occasionally delayed over concerns about non-existent terrorist groups; and proverbial cans are proverbially kicked down the proverbial road of sadness, gridlock, and despair. What's less clear is why the Senate is such a congress of louts. Is it the endless pressure to raise money? The never-ending campaign? The fact that Americans hold lots of substantive disagreements on important things and are themselves—it's been said—somewhat dysfunctional? Actually, according to Georgia state Rep. Buzz Brockaway, the biggest...

The Founding Fathers knew that in order to ratify a Constitution and preserve the fledgling United States, it was essential that the states have representation in the new Federal government. The legislative branch would be split; the people represented by the directly elected members of the House of Representatives, and each state represented by two officials appointed by the state legislatures. In the new system, the House would represent the people and the Senate would represent the states. Without a federalist system of divided, enumerated, and checked powers between the federal and state governments, no union would be possible -...

A constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, backed by President Bush and conservative groups, was soundly defeated in the Senate yesterday after proponents failed to persuade a bare majority of all senators to support the measure. Although most states have acted to prevent same-sex partners from marrying, seven Senate Republicans were wary of wading into the politically risky issue and voted against bringing the proposed amendment to a final vote. ..... Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (Tenn.) and other GOP leaders had sought the vote as a way to help galvanize their party's conservative base at a time of flagging...

"What's wrong with the people choosing their own Senators? For starters, this amendment strips power from the states, which ultimately strengthens the federal government. This Amendment removes an important check and balance between the federal government and the states."

There recently appeared an article at Salon critical of the idea of repealing the 17th Amendment. In it, author Alex Seitz-Wald explains how the desire to return the selection of U.S. Senators back over to the state legislatures, as opposed to direct election now, developed, and why it would be harmful if tried. In this piece, the first of two on the subject, I’ll summarize the argument, argue the benefits of repealing this amendment, and correct a few points made by Seitz-Wald. His overview is that the idea had been a “hobbyhorse of the fringe right” for quite some time,...

ST. LOUIS — U.S. Rep. Todd Akin, R-Wildwood, a candidate for U.S. Senate from Missouri, provided a new twist on a recent argument when he said during a Friday debate he would favor repealing the 17th Amendment. That 1913 addendum to the U.S. Constitution allows state voters to elect U.S. senators rather than having state legislatures appoint them. “I’m very concerned about states’ rights, and if I were to lean one way or the other it would be leaning going back to repeal,” Akin said during a debate sponsored by Springfield television station KY3. The repeal of the 17th Amendment...

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley signed into law a package of tax increases Tuesday targeting six-figure earners, tobacco users and companies engaged in real estate transactions to cover record spending on education. In a two-hour ceremony, it was easily the most recognizable measure O’Malley (D) signed but hardly the most popular. Rather, union members, minorities and interest groups crowded the State House to celebrate more than 200 lesser-known and often narrowly tailored bills. They passed the General Assembly with little fanfare but, taken together, will color the state’s social and political identity a slightly deeper shade of blue. The bills included...

Three of the four candidates seeking the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate in Virginia agree that efforts to repeal the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – which authorizes the direct election of senators – are impractical at best. In post-debate interviews in Roanoke on Saturday, where all four candidates participated in a forum sponsored by the Republican Party of Virginia, the candidates expressed their views on the 17th Amendment in response to questions posed by the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner. ‘Repeal Amendment’ alternative Jamie Radtke said that she does not think the repeal efforts are viable, “so I’ve been...

I spotted this chart (courtesy Larwyn, of course) at The Jacksonian Party. It explains a great deal about our current situation; one in which the people find themselves pitted against their elected officials. Prior to 1902, Congress had never reached a 70% reelection rate. Jacksonian argues that when the Senate became a directly elected body and no longer represented Statehouses, taxation and other federal usurpations of Constitutional bounds became rife. In other words, the federal government could and did use its power to begin punishing the states, regulating local affairs and interfering in every sort of arcane transaction. That change triggered...

Candidate for Senate Dan Liljenquist (left) pledged to The New American that should he be elected to the U.S. Senate he will offer legislation explicitly repealing the indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). In a press conference held on April 24 at 2:00 p.m. (MDT), the former Utah State Senator and current GOP challenger to six-term Senator Orrin Hatch described the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA as “an overreach and a violation of the Bill of Rights.” He said that had he been in office when Congress voted to pass the NDAA he would have...

Although negotiations over a package of tax increases and a proposed casino collapsed Monday night, the Maryland General Assembly passed a lot of bills this session — 791, to be exact. Of those, 96 percent were passed in the last week, including hundreds in the hours and minutes before midnight on Monday. Here are some highlights from the 90-day session’s last day: STORMWATER FEE The Senate spent much of the session’s waning hours fiercely debating a stormwater fee bill that was on few people’s radar earlier in the session. The bill requires localities to fund projects to reduce polluted runoff...

Two Democratic lawmakers in Annapolis want to spur a debate about the influence of money in politics and send a rebuke to tea party leaders by having the General Assembly ratify the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, which required that U.S. senators be elected directly by voters instead of by state legislatures. The amendment became the law of the land in 1913 after three-quarters of the states approved it. Maryland was not one of them. Attacking the amendment has become a cause among some conservatives who believe it transferred too much influence from the states to Washington. It is the...

The other day our sister newspaper, the Gloucester County Times, reported on a raid at a fraternity house at Rowan University where — get ready for a shock — some college kids were drinking. About 100 of the kids were underage and will face charges. Believe it or not, that incident has its roots in the same problem that led to the controversy over the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska. That problem lies in the way the federal government distributes highway funding: poorly. It’s obvious in the case of the bridge that would have connected the city of Ketchikan,...

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Folks, big news here. Forbes.com: "Obama Calls Democrat Leaders to White House." They have a meeting to take place shortly before three p.m. In other words: Obama has summoned Democrats only to a post-Rush show meeting at the White House. Obama has told the Democrats in Congress, the leaders: Come to the White House for a meeting after the Limbaugh show. That's what it means when you got a meeting that starts at three o'clock. That means you're meeting after the Rush show. Now, what could their problem be? You figure they got a problem. They're not...

BOISE -- A resolution supporting repeal of the amendment that gives voters the right to pick U.S. Senators has died in a House committee. The House State Affairs Committee voted 13-6 to defeat the measure encouraging the repeal of the 17th Amendment in the U.S. Constitution. The loss is a blow for Mountain Home Rep. Pete Nielsen, who claimed such a step was necessary to get the U.S. Senate more in tune with the needs of states. But several lawmakers said they were concerned with wording in measure, including a reference calling Congress an "arrogant bureaucracy."

<p>The states created the federal government; they designed it carefully to be sure that the federal government could never gain unlimited power to govern as a tyrant. Today, however, the federal government recognizes no limitations on its power, it issues edicts to states and individuals alike, with no fear of retribution. It has gained the power to rule as a tyrant – and does.</p>

The short answer to the question above is: Yes. Here is the back story. The elections this past November were truly historic for those who love freedom. The Tea Party, a grassroots libertarian insurgency cobbled together from disaffected Republicans and libertarians, managed not only to strike fear into the Establishment, but actually to throw off the Establishment's hand-picked candidates in favor of those supporting limited government. The Republicans were able to ride this wave, taking control of the House and achieving a filibuster-positive number in the Senate. What many voters may not have known, though, is that if the Constitution...

A recent exchange between Sean Hannity and one of his listeners provides an opportunity to educate the public on the 17th amendment of the United States Constitution. Sean, defending the 10th amendment - which grants those powers not specifically delegated to the United States to the States respectively - did not agree with the caller’s wish to see the 17th amendment repealed, and seemed confused as to the amendment’s implications. The 17th amendment, for the edification of Sean, was enacted in the magical year, 1913 - the year that gave us the income tax and the Fed! - and stripped...

It’s rather dismaying to see the thoughtful and well-regarded online magazine Front Porch Republic being roiled by a series of articles written by editor John Medaille celebrating the virtues of monarchism as compared to democracy. I don’t believe John’s point was call for the U.S. to build its own Buckingham Palace or design its own crown and scepter, which will never happen in a million years. It was to simply show the follies of democratism as a guarantor of the public’s liberties compared to an enlightened king (one tyrant 3,000 miles away as compared to 3,000 tyrants one mile a...

CORBIN — LEXINGTON (AP) — Kentucky Senate President David Williams told a group of law students that state legislators, not voters, should choose members of the U.S. Senate — comments that drew a negative reaction from Kentucky’s two senators. Declaring himself “a tea partier,” Williams on Wednesday called for repeal of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides for popular election of U.S. senators, the Lexington-Herald Leader reported. Williams is seeking the Republican nomination for governor next year.

Joe Miller, Alaska’s Republican nominee for the United States Senate, recently expressed support for an idea that is rapidly gaining steam in Tea Party circles: the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment. Miller subsequently backtracked from his statement, but he shouldn’t have: Repealing the Seventeenth Amendment would go a long way toward restoring federalism and frustrating special-interest influence over Washington. Ratified in 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment replaced the election of U.S. senators by state legislators with the current system of direct election by the people. By securing the Seventeenth Amendment’s ratification, progressives dealt a blow to the Framers’ vision of the...

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller told a Fairbanks audience Monday that he would back an amendment to repeal the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitition.That’s the 1913 amendment that shifted the job of selecting U.S. senators from each state legislature  and required a popular vote in each state.The issue has garnered support from some Tea Party candidates across the country.The idea, apparently, is that if senators are selected by legislators, they would be less susceptible to special interests and more supportive of states’ rights.A Wall Street Journal law blog summarizes the argument this way:  “Nowadays, Senate candidates have to...

Otter shifts stand on 17th Amendment repeal; The Spokesman-Review Idaho Gov. Butch Otter declared during a political debate today that he doesn’t favor repeal of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution - though he’s been sharply critical of the amendment for the past year, including in his keynote speech at a Tea Party rally in Spokane in April. The amendment shifted selection of U.S. senators from state Legislatures to a vote of the people, and repealing it is a plank in Idaho’s Republican Party platform. The governor’s comments came as he and Democratic challenger Keith Allred sparred over everything...

I should start by acknowledging that repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment is hardly a mainstream issue and certainly not anything likely to come about (which is an understatement). However, the fact that there are people out there seeking its repeal is sufficient to garner comment, especially since said persons were significant enough within factions of the Tea Party movement to actually get some Senate candidates to state that they were in support of the repeal. Further, every once in a while I will get a commenter who is favor a repeal, so it seems worth some discussion.The proximate cause of...

There's an excellent Peggy Noonan column pointing out that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, not necessarily the Tea Party, is the model for conservative Republicans ought to follow. The entire column is really worth a read ... but this one paragraph stood out: "Thus the new DNC scare ad, which features the usual "Jaws"-like monster music, and then the charge that the Tea Party and the GOP are "one and the same." Not only that, they're cooking up a plan to "get rid of" or privatize Social Security and Medicare, repeal the 17th Amendment, and abolish the departments of energy...

Original provisions of the Constitution intended to prevent Congress from enacting “dumb� laws were vitiated by ratification of the 17th Amendment. Before ratification of the 17th Amendment it’s unlikely that a Senate committee would have needed to raise the sort of question posed by Senator Coburn during confirmation hearings on Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court. A Wall Street Journal editorial reports: If Congress passed a law saying Americans were required to eat three fruits and three vegetables a day, Mr. Coburn asked, would that be legitimate under the Commerce Clause? It sounds like a “dumb law,� Ms. Kagan...

The New York Times recently published two back-to-back articles (here and here) mocking members of the Tea Party Movement for supporting repeal of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution—the one that changed the election of US Senators from state legislatures to the popular vote system we have today. Having endorsed this idea myself on occasion, I am compelled to say that just because some crazy people endorse an idea doesn’t necessarily make the idea crazy. Following are links to some serious commentaries supporting a return to the original system of electing senators established by the Constitution.   George Mason Law...

Idaho Republicans held their convention over the past weekend, approving a platform containing some mighty interesting parts of the Tea Party platform -- from state nullification of federal laws, to protecting the institution of marriage from transgendered people, to to a Glenn-Beckesque embrace of gold and silver money. State Rep. Marv Hagedorn (R) told the Associated Press that the push to go further right was a product of disgust with the current status quo from the Obama administration. "It does reflect a change," said Hagedorn. "But it's not a change in our party, it's a change in the White House."...

Delaware officially ratifies Amendment 17 of the U.S. Constitution that provides for the popular election of U.S. Senators. 98 years ago, several states had already ratified the amendment, making it a part of the Constitution, so the 45th General Assembly apparently felt no need to do so. But the 145th General Assembly put their ceremonial stamp on it...

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) - Republicans from across Idaho took aim at the 17th amendment during their state convention, calling for repeal of the measure. A GOP committee narrowly passed a measure Friday to include language in the state party's platform that seeks to nullify the amendment created a century ago to shift election of U.S. senators from state legislatures to voters.

ounding Father James Madison was not an imposing figure, standing only about 5 foot, 4 inches and weighing less than 100 pounds. He may not have been imposing to look at, but he was an intellectual force to be reckoned with. He is also often referred to as the "father of the Constitution."

Why the 17th Amendment was a bad idea The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution allowed for direct election by the voters of their senators. Never mind that the Founding Fathers foresaw that was a bad idea - onward in our rush toward democracy! (something else the Founders knew to be a mistake) Not only does direct election of senators lead those senators to compete in confiscating and redistributing wealth in order to buy votes, but there's also the distinct possibility that, (Hm, how can I put this delicately?) if a significant portion of the electorate in your state is...

The 17th Amendment is stupid: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years…. But let me start at the beginning.  Article I § 3 cl. 1 of the Constitution originally established the election of Senators through the state legislatures.  The Federalist #62 laid out numerous arguments for the Constitutional framework of the Senate and its method of selection. The senatorial trust, which, requiring greater extent of information and stability of character, requires at the same time that the senator should have reached a period of...

One of the arguments I often read opposing the repeal of the 17th Amendment, strangely enough comes by a variety of people from different ideologies, is that our state legislators are more corrupt than our elected federal legislators. To me this sounds completely absurd. Yet time and time again I read in almost every comment portion of an article discussing the repeal of the 17th Amendment this very statement. I have done a search through a couple of different scholarly search engines and I have not found any research to support this opinion. So where does this idea or opinion...

Few members of the Tea Party have endorsed Rand Paul’s misgivings about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but a surprising number are calling for the repeal of an older piece of transformative legislation: the 17th Amendment. If you don’t have the Constitution on your smartphone, that’s the one adopted in 1913 that provides for direct popular election of United States senators. Allowing Americans to choose their own senators seems so obvious that it is hard to remember that the nation’s founders didn’t really trust voters with the job. The people were given the right to elect House members. But...