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

Skip to comments.

A lesson for Sean Hannity on the 17th amendment
Canada Free Press ^ | December 15, 2010 | Greg Halvorson

Posted on 12/16/2010 1:04:46 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

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to the United States to the States respectively - did not agree with the caller’s wish to see the 17th amendment repealed, and seemed confused as to the amendment’s implications.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 the power of state legislatures to elect Senators, delegating this duty to the people of each state, respectfully.

This damaged states’ rights and weakened the 10th amendment. As I stated in an e-mail:

Dear Sean—concerning the 17th amendment, the argument for its repeal absolutely centers around states’ rights. If Senators are elected by elected reps and senators, they are more likely to defend their state against federal encroachments (upholding the 10th amendment), than they are if elected by the general population. Any federal program - ObamaCare, the financial reform bill, etc., - which increases burdens on state budgets would not sit well with Senators answerable to congressional bodies in their state.

So, yes, the 17th amendment lacked foresight. As unprincipled Senators in all 50 states swagger about the Capitol, schmoozing with lobbyists and expanding government, it’s important to know why. On November 2, 2010, the People voted to defend the Constitution. But while all men are equal...

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; 17thamendment; 1913; congress; hannity; legislatures; repeal; seanhannity; senate; states
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: rellimpank

Nope, but people can get away from a State, leaving the country is a different matter.


41 posted on 12/16/2010 5:02:37 PM PST by itsahoot (We the people, allowed Republican leadership to get us here, only God's Grace can get us out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

He would be another unknown, had Rush not let him take the EIB chair occasionally. I think Rush regrets it.


42 posted on 12/16/2010 5:09:20 PM PST by itsahoot (We the people, allowed Republican leadership to get us here, only God's Grace can get us out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Don't kid yourself, the money will just be spent in other ways. Trying to take the money out of politics is like trying to take the money out of prostitution. It cannot be done because they are basically the same.

I'd like to see your reasons why the money will still be spent.

To me, the money goes towards endless Boxer and Fiorina ads every 15 minutes on every channel on my TV set for months and months during the primaries and during the general. Are you saying that ads like this will still continue if the state legislature did the chusing?

What about bribery laws? Where will the money be spent on the state legislature selection of Senators that won't be illegal?

-PJ

43 posted on 12/16/2010 5:14:34 PM PST by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
If people think repealing the 17th amendment will solve anything, they only need look at the recent record of lame dumbass corrupt liberal nobodies who got appointed last term in the Senate to be proved wrong.

Good point. The idea that state legislatures would magically become something they haven't been in generations if they had the power to choose Senators doesn't hold much water.

The Amendment went through because if the Senate weren't popularly elected it would lose power, as all legislatures that aren't popularly elected have done in the last 200 years.

The Senate would have become merely a formality, a rubber stamp, and power would have passed to the House, which could claim with more accuracy to represent "the people."

44 posted on 12/16/2010 5:17:20 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

“You’re citing Senators appointed by governors on the death of a sitting senator...not selected by state legislatures as per pre-17th Amendment guidelines.”

True, but why would state leges be any different? Same class of political animal.
And you DO know that pre-17th amendment many states were electing Senators popularly anyway. Right?


45 posted on 12/16/2010 8:30:40 PM PST by WOSG (Carpe Diem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
He’s yet to figure out the proper usage of “me” and “I”.”

The loss of control of symbolic expression is the final step in being conquered by those who have mastered symbolic expression.

s'up. no problem.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

46 posted on 12/16/2010 8:37:37 PM PST by The Comedian (Government: Saving people from freedom since time immemorial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
"True, but why would state leges be any different? Same class of political animal."

Not quite. State legislators tend to be a lot more responsive to their constituents. Many are term limited, and I'm not aware of any state legislators that sit comfortably for six long years, although there very well could be some. All that makes them a very different class of political animal.

"And you DO know that pre-17th amendment many states were electing Senators popularly anyway. Right?"

Of course, but I would make two caveats to that. Prior to the passage of the 17th, I would submit that the average voter had a much better grasp of the concepts of federalism and voted accordingly; I would venture a guess that the common mischaracterization of our system as a "democracy" built a lot of steam following that time, and that has been a philosophically detrimental force. My second rejoinder would be that as long as some senate seats were by appointment, it becomes more difficult for labor unions and other lobby groups to nationalize them. You could argue that would free up more resources to target the seats in popularly elected states, but in a sense, they'd only be getting less for more.

47 posted on 12/16/2010 8:53:05 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy; fieldmarshaldj; GOPsterinMA

Dear G-d, they never stop with this!

I still don’t want Mike Madigan appointing my Senators!


48 posted on 12/17/2010 3:02:30 AM PST by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

“He would be another unknown, had Rush not let him take the EIB chair occasionally. I think Rush regrets it”.

...Rush doesn’t regret it. He likes to see people get ahead and he enjoys helping with that. Sean is no competition for Rush. It’s all about looks and the “fair and balanced” routine with Sean’s success. It’s about women 35-54. That’s why he does well on TV. Rush didn’t do so well.


49 posted on 12/17/2010 3:46:51 AM PST by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

“Trying to take the money out of politics is like trying to take the money out of prostitution. It cannot be done because they are basically the same.”
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Why is everyone who comments on our politicians so disrespectful...of prostitutes?


50 posted on 12/17/2010 5:23:48 AM PST by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

He’s yet to figure out the proper usage of “me” and “I”.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

He has a lot of company!
As country kids in fifth grade we used to catch it from the teacher for saying, “Me and Jimmy went fishing.” Now we hear some supposedly educated person saying, “Jimmy went fishing and gave his catch to John and I.” One is just as wrong as the other.
Then we hear the “first lady” with her Harvard law degree saying, “Me and Barack.......”

Folks what got dem advanced degrees be talkin’ like po’ folk.


51 posted on 12/17/2010 5:35:19 AM PST by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SFC Chromey
Hannity is not the brightest bulb out there. He doesn’t know any topic that is not listed on current talking points.

Ya gotta kinda admire him though. Not knowing anything about the subject doesn't stop him from talking about it. /S

52 posted on 12/17/2010 5:35:27 AM PST by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mylife
and they like.....*Sean says Newt*

Sean used to say *McCain* too. It's amazing to see how well that worked out for us.

53 posted on 12/17/2010 5:38:19 AM PST by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
If people think repealing the 17th amendment will solve anything, they only need look at the recent record of lame dumbass corrupt liberal nobodies who got appointed last term in the Senate to be proved wrong. We had 6 of them and if *any* of them were in the top half of ‘good senators’ I didn’t notice.

I generally agree with the characterization of these six Senators as dregs, but disagree with you on two points.

The first point is that these dregs were appointed as placeholders. The governors who appointed them (at least in the case of Florida and West Virginia) didn't want a strong Senator who could challenge them for the seat during the regular election.

The second point is that these folks, as I mentioned earlier, were appointed by Governors....not by the State Legislatures. I think you may be mixing apples and oranges on this one.

54 posted on 12/17/2010 5:57:20 AM PST by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RipSawyer
Why is everyone who comments on our politicians so disrespectful...of prostitutes?

--chortle--

55 posted on 12/17/2010 7:56:21 AM PST by frogjerk (I believe in unicorns, fairies and pro-life Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
And you DO know that pre-17th amendment many states were electing Senators popularly anyway. Right?

As was their right to do however they wanted. The problem is that the States rights were taken away by the 17th amendment.

56 posted on 12/17/2010 7:58:33 AM PST by frogjerk (I believe in unicorns, fairies and pro-life Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RipSawyer
You nailed it.

“Me and Jimmy went fishing.” I correct people by asking them to drop out the words "and Jimmy." = "Me went fishing."

"Me Tarzan, you Jane."

57 posted on 12/17/2010 8:21:26 AM PST by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

“And you DO know that pre-17th amendment many states were electing Senators popularly anyway. Right?”
“As was their right to do however they wanted. The problem is that the States rights were taken away by the 17th amendment.”

3/4ths of the states agree to this change. It was convenient to have a consistent rule as to how US Senators got there. Repealing the 17th amendment will be a waste of time for a simple reason: Every state will continue to elect Senators by popular vote anyway. Why? Because voters (like me) will demand it. I dont trust my State Rep to make this decision.


58 posted on 12/17/2010 9:30:33 AM PST by WOSG (Carpe Diem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Retired COB

Now that made me laugh!


59 posted on 12/17/2010 11:26:54 AM PST by SFC Chromey (We are at war with Islamofascists inside and outside our borders, now ACT LIKE IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: albie
Rush doesn’t regret it.

If you listened to Rush as much as I do, you would know better than say that, He just doesn't have anything good to say about him. Levin on the other adores him, and I like Levin.

Ever notice that Glenn Beck has never been mentioned by Hannity? Levin says there is a lot of posturing going on that threaten Hannity.

60 posted on 12/17/2010 1:37:27 PM PST by itsahoot (We the people, allowed Republican leadership to get us here, only God's Grace can get us out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

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.

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