Posted on 11/12/2010 8:31:29 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at thetimestribune.com ...
“Big money, special interests, personal fiefdoms, hackery and the like...”
Yes, things sure have changed!
Then the Senate would represent the States.
I’d settle for term limits especially in the senate. No more than two consecutive terms of four years each. Eliminate the six year term and make it four years as well but two years apart from the other senator. I don’t support it as much for Reps as redistricting helps stop some of the career congresscritters.
This won't strengthen the states, but rather will strengthen the two party system even more. Remember, even the so called conservative dem reps in the House voted for Pelosi, not who their constituents wanted them to vote for. If legislatures choose senators, it will not be the person their constituents want, but the person the national parties tell them to choose. Imagine how many conservative Republicans would in the senate if the RNC was calling the shots, likewise, how many moderate dems would there be if the DNC was calling it. The Tea Party would be a nonentity in the senate if the 17th were repealed. If you really want to make the states more powerful, reduce the power of federal judges; they are the ones who block reform at every opportunity. Congress has that Constitutional power.
Problem is, none of the state legislatures in existence today have this kind of governing mindset. The appointments to the senate would hardly be free from current politics. Nobody there believes in the kind of state sovereignty that existed at the beginning.
Not saying it wouldn’t be nice, I am saying there’s no way to get it back in the current system, as it stands now.
He is actually on target with this call. The 17th Amendment deprived the states of their ability to keep the federal power in check. The framers were not fools! They had a sound rationale to having US Senators elected by the individual State legislatures. Why?
Because it is sound principle to have federal Senators under the watchful eye of the State Senators, who are in turn, responsible to the voters of their individual districts. Thus the interest of the individual States are preserved.
Under the original arrangement, the voters wielded greater power over the actions of their federal Senators, for reason that the citizens of a State held more influence over their State legislator (an authority restricted to their associated legislative districts) In other words, the pre-17th Amendment arrangement “amplified” the power of the citizens of each State to rein in any mischief the federal Senator might attempt contrary to the best interests of that State.
The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution neutered State sovereignty.
Keep in mind that the US Constitution is an “enduring” document ... To wit: while the Constitution may be “organically” modified through the amendment process (made more clear in its actions) the basic precepts (how the government is structured) must not be changed, else the framework of “checks and balances” on federal power is compromised.
Article I, Section 4 clearly prohibits changing the place for choosing Senators. Amendment 17 violates this provision.
The 16th Amendment violates the 5th Amendment that protects against self-incrimination (Bill of Rights)
The 22nd Amendment, which limits the Executive to two terms, violates the “separation of powers” edict. The Legislative and the Judicial branches are not so limited.
The 23 Amendment gave Washington DC 3 electoral votes; however, the Constitution requires that electors be based on the combined number of US Senators and Congressional Representatives. Amendment 23 violates this provision.
Note that these Amendments: 16, 17, 22, and 23 violate key components in the structure of our government. Necessary components planned by the framers, who knew too well the weaknesses of men. To retrain the federal power—which is to be an “agent” of the several States, but only within the prescribed boundaries enumerated by the Constitution—these four Amendments MUST be repealed.
“Let no more be heard of confidence in man, But bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” — Thomas Jefferson
Why this complicated mess? Why not just return to the ORIGINAL PLAN of the framers?
I'm for it if they go all the way back to original plan to elect POTUS as well. The DEM's and the GOP aren't about to give up their controlling power over us & allow it to happen though.
David Williams won’t get too far in his repeal 17 effort. But you can see that our movement will go off the rails ... and give the voters another excuse to put the RATS back in power. People just don’t know how to stay relevant.
We cannot cut Dept of Ed budget by 10%, but let’s talk to the press about our daydreams and our political fantasies about Constitutionalism.
The 17th Amendment was one of the primary tools that the socialists used to destroy the power of the states and place it in the hands of the federal government. After the 17th Amendment was passed, the state governors and legislators no longer had a voice in what Washington did.
However, the current Senate makeup would be about 50-50 and would rapidly go 60 Republican, 40 Rat within 4 years. And a senator would rarely spend more than one term in office as the legislature decided it would be someone else’s turn every 6 years. No more +40 year senators.
The Republicans control the State Senate in Kentucky - Williams has been the Senate president for some time.
However...I don’t think repeal of the 17th amendment is one of those issues not easy to explain and doesn’t make sense to make as an issue as a campaign for governor - it can only be used against him later in ads saying “Williams wants to take away your right to vote!” This was, politically, not a wise move.
That’s true...they’d probably vote in people who would bring them back more money to spend themselves in their own budgets.
Exactly right! With over 680 conservative state legislatures voted in with the mid terms this year, it shows this would give more control back to the States and especially to the voters.
I agree that Senators should be elected by their legislatures since the Senate would serve as a check against federal power especially mandates. A senator votes to cost states more money, the home state’s legislature fires his @$$ !
Y-E-S-S-S-S-S-S!!!!!!
The 17th is not about producing a better class of Senators, it's about restoring state's rights and making the senators more beholden to the state.
When the 17th was ratified, it formally changed our form of government from a representative republic to a true democracy (i.e. mob rule). When you look at the makeup of the Senate today, you have a group of people who are literally beholden to power brokers and big money types, NOT their state or the needs of the states. That's what's been lost in the mix.
True, prior to passage of the 17th, the corruption of the state legislatures ran rampant but, IMO, that can be more easily controlled today.
Couldn’t repeal the 17th today. Today’s voters aren’t taught civics beyond “separate but equal”, “Democrats are our saviors” and “Republicans suck”.
The one-and-out Dem Kosmas campaign ran an ad against her Rep challenger Adams, that dredged up a statement Adams once made that said the 17th should be repealed. Of course, Kosmas framed it as that Adams wanted to “take away your right to vote”.
And that’s how the idiot Democrat voters of today would perceive it.
I am for that. It is time to repeal a lot. In fact we should focus on undoing a lot of the mess we have created...no new laws are needed. We already have too many.
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.