Posted on 02/25/2016 9:26:00 AM PST by Fhios
In a bit of unusual news, the Utah Senate voted 20-6 to ask Congress to repeal the 17th Amendment of the Constitution. The 17th Amendment allows for the direct election of senators. The bill's sponsor, Sen. Al Jackson (R-Highland) argued that the 17th Amendment was not what the founders of the country had intended and changed the meaning of the role of the senators.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
The 17A is an outrage. It must go.
Like you, I wasn't supportive of term limits until recently. It wasn't until a lightbulb went off after slowly reading and considering the preambles to the Declaration and Constitution.
Our institutions are the means to ends as per the Declaration and Constitution. Our national experience has shown that unlimited reelection doesn't serve the ends of free government. Therefore, term limits should be employed.
It really is as simple as that.
We don't oppose the 1st Amendment because some individuals libel and slander others.
That a gun can be used for suicide or armed robbery is no reason to shun the 2nd Amendment.
Etc.
In further support of an Article V convention, I can't recall a single time the sovereign people of any nation who met with the intention of correcting errors ever sold themselves into slavery.
We are way past normal political methods as a means of reform.
Here is the Indiana statute that will govern commissions.
You’re welcome.
Your and others’ ardent stand and argument against the 17A helped me to see its removal is an important part of recovery of freedom and constitutional limited government in America.
No senator gets elected without being beholden to party resources, support, money, experts, etc.
Instead of being responsible to party leaders, state appointed senators will be responsible to fewer than a hundred men and women who will closely watch every vote over their entire term.
The restoration of free government is impossible until the 17A is repealed.
The way to deal with corruption is criminal prosecution, and not by upsetting a carefully crafted system designed to ensure the ends of our Declaration and Constitution.
Article V ping!
I agree. Further, I am of the opinion that the State houses also need to be bicameral with the state senate representing the interests of the counties. This would create a significant shift in power from the current concentration in the cities and large population centers to the more rural and urban areas / counties.
You’re correct that the 16th gave no new power to tax. They always had the power to tax income, and so they did. Bad idea in my opinion, but my opinion doesn’t matter, it’s the law.
Are you a tax protester? You certainly sound like one.
It is an old slang term for “Constitutional Convention” my apologies for not clarifying its use.
You make an excellent point, but power corrupts everyone.
My ability to trust gov’t or its minions is non-existent.
This would include people appointed for a COS (as you put it).
Maybe I am just a perpetual worry-wort as my mother used to say.
Maybe I am just a perpetual worry-wort as my mother used to say
Nah, makes you Jeffersonian. Didn't really want a feral govt, why should the people of today bind the political preferences of the next generation?
A society can only exist if each successive generation venerates and protects the institutions of previous generations.
Text-book answer but so very true.
And from that perspective, consider the COS as this generation’s effort to protect (and, now, restore) the institutions of the previous generations.
It is that pesky trust issue I have with people holding power, I suppose.
I don’t trust them to do what they would be sent to do.
Political types gather in a room and the conversation turns to “What can I get for myself?”
XVI begins: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes..."
If this is not a grant of power to Congress, what is it?
“Remember, when the 17th amendment was passed in the first place, we had a well-informed and engaged electorate.”
I think having passed the 16th, 17th, Fed. Reserve, SS, etc. w/out a Citizen revolt belies your presumption.
“I do not think those who passed the 17th amendment could envision a time when the electorate....”
When do Socialists care about the electorate? They care only for the long-game: CONTROL. ~100+ yrs. and their goals pretty much accomplished.
You have to define what income is because the SCOTUS has ruled, it doe snot mean “all that comes in”, it is limited to earnings form very specific activity. It is, therefore, the activity that is the subject of the tax, and the amount of tax owed which is determined by the dollars those activities produce.
I’m not even gonna read the comments. Don’t need the aggravation.
Bob Bennett would be THRILLED, cause he’d still be a GD Senator. EPIC FAIL.
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.