Good question.
Why don't you ask Vlad and Dmitri. They know how this works ...
Posted on 08/30/2016 7:37:02 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
With the prospect of a President Donald Trump or a President Hillary Clinton on the horizon, the growing trend toward the executive acting without the consent of Congress is troubling to all political stripes. Both parties claim to worry about a strong presidency, at least if the other party is in the White House.
That trend has been exacerbated by President Obama, but it certainly didn’t start with him. With the exception of Calvin Coolidge, every president of the 20th and 21st centuries contributed to the problem.
Many proposals to address the imperial presidency have been floated over the decades. Some have even been implemented. None has stemmed the tide.
To rebalance the separation of powers, it is necessary to make Congress stronger. The best way to do that? Abolish the Senate.
The original constitutional purpose of the Senate — to represent the states, not the people who live in them — has long since been abandoned. With the 17th Amendment’s requirement that senators be popularly elected, there is no chance that it will ever be recovered.
Likewise, the original political purpose of the Senate — to act as a “cooling saucer” for the hot passions of the more-democratic House — has fallen victim to the evolving nature of American governance. The Senate has become more like the House, partly because more House members are being elected to the Senate, and also because the Senate’s real institutionalists — such as West Virginia Democrat Robert C. Byrd and Mississippi Republican Trent Lott — are no longer around.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The 14th amendment was written to protect freed slaves. One of the ways it has been abused is the creation of new “classes” of people the amendment supposedly protects—as opposed to the only class named in the amendment: “persons.”
Since they are now all deceased, the amendment should be repealed. (It should have contained a clause repealing itself upon the death of the last freed slave.)
Repeal would vaporize all the wretched jurisprudence that depends on contorting the 14 amendment.
The Senate was already corrupted by women’s suffrage by 1913.
Every state where women got the vote, government began to grow.
If the vote is not taken away from women, they will destroy the United States.
Senators were supposed to represent the state legislatures in Washington DC and were appointed by them.
I could get behind that... I might expand it to anyone who pays income taxes, i.e. works, or owns “property” (investments).
I think the initial limit to property owners was because they paid taxes, and there was no income tax back then.
I heard that at one time the voters didn’t elect them? Is that wrong/right/partially right?
They used to be appointed by State Legislatures. I believe that the 17th Amendment changed that to being voted in by state voters.
Gone downhile ever since.
For the treasury looting, look at the Tax Reform
and Fiscal Responsibility
amendments in the booklet. The main advantage of the given amendment makes it clear that the Senator is not an employee of the federal government (an argument used to evade accountability) and explicitly states that the States have full control over the means by which their senators may be removed or replaced
.
The 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913.
Prior to that time, Senators were appointed by State Legislators and approved by the Governor, subject to recall at any time that the aforementioned decided that the Senator was not acting in the best interest of the State.
Some folks (like *me* for instance) would argue that the Senate as described in the Constitution has not existed since that time.
Good question.
Why don't you ask Vlad and Dmitri. They know how this works ...
That’s not recent enough to blame on the 60s crop of liberals.
WTH were they thinking.
STOP TINKERING!! The rapist was wrong. The constitution isn’t a living and breathing document. It was written to STAY that way.
Of course some amendments were just. This one was just stupid.
OneWingedShark says: Honestly, to keep the incumbent advantage
down; it's simply to keep a senator from really "settling in" not keep the States from sending someone back for a third term. Constraining the states WRT Senators is the opposite of the intent of the amendment, but a little constraint in the issue is needful.
Plus I dont know my amendments from my elbow but I shall take care of that in quick time.
Tomorrow’s studies are the amendments.
This is true, and part of what the Judicial Reform Amendment
in that booklet is meant to do.
The *real* reason for this amendment (and you won’t find this in the history books)
goes far beyond simply making the Senate into a “populist” group.
It is part of deconstructing the States. The ultimate goal of
the Globalists/Statist was and is to erase all vestiges of
local autonomy, whether it be State, County, City or Town.
The reason for this is simple.
They want to destroy personal freedom and the liberty of the individual.
Under strict construction of the US Constitution, coming
after one’s personal liberty wasn’t all that easy.
But if you take away the layers of protection afforded by home rule,
administration of justice county by county and the autonomy
of the States which was the founding principle and impetus
for a Federal Republic (as opposed to a pure Democracy or
a Monarchy or whathaveyou) then the individual is left
exposed to the brute force of the central government.
Making the Senate into an Oligarchy bought and paid for
by political parties beholden to special interests was
just one brick in the wall.
And those special interests were/are primarily
the Globalist/Statists I mentioned earlier.
Before the Civil War, the term was “the United States are...”. After the war, it became “ the United States is...”.
The 17th Ammendment was Woodrow Wilson’s tool to destroy the Representative Republic and replace is with a Mobocracy.
In the House, we are a democracy. In the Senate, we are a Republic. We need both.
No.
Two term limit for both houses.
No kingdoms built...folks go back to their real jobs.
Reverting the selection of Senators to pre 17th method will restore the representation of each States population. Currently only the urbanized population centers are represented or the majority voting block. Pennsylvania’s as an example. The Senate and house are both controlled by the GOP but we end up with D governors and Federal level D senators.
It’s because Philly/Pittsburgh and the other small cities are controlling state wide elections. If we get rid of the 175th then each county would have input.
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.