Keyes wants legislators, not you, to pick senators

Daily Herald ^ | 8/13/04 | John Patterson

[Kegger]

I think its the State legislators that would pick, not the United States House of Representatives.

[4CJ]

I think its the State legislators that would pick, not the United States House of Representatives.

Correct. The principle is one of separation of powers.

[tuliptree76]

ingpay

[TigersEye]

I'm rather surprised to hear that from you. You're usually pretty well read on such things.

Thank you. All I can say is there are too many subjects and too little time.

I am up on Dr. Keyes 1st A. fight behind Judge Moore and I watched as many Keyes programs as I could when he had a TV show but I'm afraid I'm not totally up to speed on him. My bad too.

My first awareness of him was from his debate speech in 2000. I was stunned. I wanted him for President on the spot.

[TigersEye]

Oh, as for not knowing Dr. Keyes supports repealing the 17th A. I should have added "I'm not surprised."

[Aquinasfan]

And maybe somebody needs to ask Obama how he will feel being nothing more than "a glorified representative", which is all that Senators are today with the way things are, if he wins the election.

Good point.

[Aquinasfan]

My first awareness of him was from his debate speech in 2000. I was stunned. I wanted him for President on the spot.

The appropriate response 8-)

[TigersEye]

Unfortunately I think he's disqualified for being too intelligent, too eloquent and believing in original intent. IOWs he's too American for the 21st Century.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Maxine Waters wouldn't be doing it. It would be the state legislators' job (who generally are more conservative than national politicians) and one thing you just about guarantee is that with so many state politicians wanting the job, one or two terms is all that you are going to spend as a US Senator. Also, there are currently more states' legislatures controlled or split by the GOP to easily swing the balance to the Republicans.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Legislative appointment of Senators was designed to minimize Democracy. State powers were deliberately reduced under the Constitution. The reason the Convention was called was specifically to increase the power of the National government and REDUCE the powers of the States.

Federalism is a structure wherein the States have NO power over National issues. Their powers are confined to affecting issues WITHIN the state boundaries and NOWHERE else.

Senators never represented state interests any more than Representatives did under the actual design of the constitution. Only by considering the State interest as viewed by the Legislature as somehow different than the State interest as viewed by the electorate could this method of appointment produce a divergent result from direct election.

An objective examination of the role of the Senate as stated in the Constitution clearly shows that it was concerned with the Long Term interests of the Nation. There is not one word in it pointing to a primary concern with state interests.

[Protagoras]

Because of the people in Congress these days, that's why! Do you want Maxine Waters and Henry Waxman picking CAlifornia's Senators? I don't.

So you would rather have the wierdos who have been selecting them? They sure have picked some winners. BTW, you are confused, the Senators were elected by the STATE legislatures, not the US legislatures.

The founders were right, you are wrong.

[mabelkitty]

They shouldn't be elected.
They should be chosen the legislature of each state.
I agree.
Now we have the Senate Royal Princes who are lifers and never get voted out.
It wasn't supposed to be like that - it doesn't work, and the amendment made it worse.

[sheltonmac]

This would be a good thing.

I disagree. This would be a great thing.