Posted on 12/02/2019 1:12:20 AM PST by Jacquerie
Subtitle: Conclusions of Jay S. Bybee - Ulysses at the Mast.
Bybee’s 1997 work was my first scholarly exposure to the 17th Amendment. Bybee opened my eyes to the central and indispensable place a Senate of the States held in our Framers’ system. Failed democratic republics litter history, and as Western democracies today fail in their first purpose, defense of their borders and culture, we may find James Madison prescient when he warned that “Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security of the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” America, circa 2019, operates on borrowed time.
CONCLUSION.
For its defenders, the Seventeenth Amendment was the "wildest and widest revolution.., since the Constitution of the United States was adopted in 1787.'' To its detractors, it was "the total product of those who believed in the illusion of reform. In some respects, the Seventeenth Amendment represents both a significant change in the structure of the Constitution and a failed reform of a system gone awry. Far from bringing the process of government close to the lay voter, the Seventeenth Amendment may well have insulated the voter even further from his government. In the end, the Amendment may have served neither the purposes of federalism nor the ideals of democracy. In New York v. United States, Justice O'Connor observed:
(Excerpt) Read more at scholars.law.unlv.edu ...
Research bump
Later
Later
TIMES UP!
We're into the "Praetorian Guard" phase of the decline and fall of America that Thomas Jefferson predicted 200 yrs ago.
When all government ...in little as in great things... shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power; it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1821
FReepers should take note of the historical lessons in Russia.
First, the Tsars were driven out by populists.
While they were trying to form a gov’t, the communists stepped in and took over as “friends of the working class”.
It did not happen overnight and the players were all known for years before Lenin rose to the top.
We should keep these historical events in mind at all times.
Federalism was severely damaged when we adopted this retarded amendment. The commies rejoiced with the overwhelming shift to centralized power. It is the single worst development to the original structure of our Republic and needs to be repealed. Shame on our educational systems for not teaching so.
Washington DC was never intended to be that which it has become today. It is the greatest liability to the States
The word “class” is an ideological term and anyone using it should be suspect.
Bump
The restoration of the Constitution will bring us back to our roots.
Can we get rid of the 16th too, while we are at it?
Yep. How often do you hear “the American class”?
I’ve heard “the American working class” several times but never just “the American class”.
Considering how corrupt many state legislatures are I don’t see how repealing the 17th Amendment would make much difference at this point. It might be better to focus on goals that are actually attainable and would make a difference to America, such as using the good economy to pay down the $23 trillion deficit.
As I recall, one argument for the 17th was that some/many Senators were bought and paid for by special interests bribing key members of state legislatures and that ‘bribing’ a whole state’s electorate would be financially impossible. And of course it would be much more ‘democratic’.
I think that history has shown the first argument to be false—by dumping lots of money into an election Senators are still bought and paid for. What it did do, of course is change the very structure of American Federalism. Senators were originally in place to represent state governments, not the people. That’s why Senators get to vote on treaties. And it is why states are equally represented in the Senate—a feature that leftists still decry.
I have believed from the moment I understood the constitution that the 17th amendment destroyed the Republic as envisioned by our founders. The states no longer had any direct voice in at the federal level, and senators elected by the public were fully beholden to their parties and would happily vote for things that were destructive to their constituents and states.
Unfunded mandates would not exist in a world where State Legislatures elected Senators, for example.
The House is for the people, the Senate is for the States.... The 17th Amendment completely removed the States from the table at the Federal Level.
There was corruption in the appointment/election of Senators pre the 17th amendment, but the popular election of them has been far more destructive IMHO
I’ve wondered how the incredible energy was developed to ratify the 17th Amendment and found the reason in Joseph Tartakovsky’s book, “The Lives of the Constitution.” The steel, railroad, oil pioneers and others were running the Senate and many cities. These powerful forces were destroying our republic with their own sort of corruption. The Amendment was a fitting solution at the time, now is allowing another form of corruption.
I hope so, but I’ll settle for one evil sibling at a time.
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.