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 ...
“They always had the power to tax income”
Disagree. Congress always had the power to TAX, but only for that which was enumerated/authorized; else, why pass an Amendment to specify that which already existed??
Still, I’m of the mind (aside from the 13th), the 16th violates our 4th/5th Rights (w/out specifying that is supersedes - IE: repeal of Prohibition), and is thus invalid on its face. Been trying to figure how one ‘voluntarily’ gives up their 5th A. Rights when filing is ‘mandatory’...Can anyone say ‘under duress’??
Course, the Courts have never given any indication at exactly what % they ‘deem’ slavery to exist; < 100% of course. Yet another conflict that invalidate.
Lastly, EVERYONE is a ‘tax denier’; especially come April 15th. No one voluntarily sends all their $$ into the govt and says, “Do as you wish. Oh, and I could use a couple bucks back, too.”
The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and Ratification.
Proposal:
There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.
Article V gives Congress and an Amendments Convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, no more and no less.
Disposal:
Once Congress, or an Amendments Convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:
The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.
Ratification:
Depending upon which ratification method is chosen by Congress, either the state legislatures vote up-or-down on the proposed amendment, or the voters elect a state ratifying convention to vote up-or-down. If three-quarters of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.
Forbidden Subjects:
Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.
Explicitly forbidden:
Implicitly forbidden:
Reference works:
Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers
State Initiation of Constitutional Amendments: A Guide for Lawyers and Legislative Drafters
That’s precisely what happened at the Continental Congresses and Constitutional Convention. Chartered to do “X” and that morphed into doing “Y.”
This would be outstanding!
Not sure the people are ready for this yet, but it would solve so many problems, hard to count them all.
‘Senators reporting state Govt would be less likely to put their state in bad financial positions. If they did, they could be recalled at will by the legislature.’
Yep. And states’ rights would be protected. In other words, the appointment of activist judges would END when it comes to widening of the commerce clause, treaty powers that compromise our bill of rights, etc.
Justices would need to be constitutionalists. Every time states’ rights get trampled, their sensitivity to constitutionalist interpretation would increase.
For exmaple, Obama v Arizona.
Good to have your historic perspective.
But constitutional interpretation collapsed after the 17th amendment. Rise of the progressive movement. We had HALF the world’s GDP back in 1900. How has our nation gotten any better after electing senators?
It would be a good start. Repealing the 16th would be another step in the right direction.
I am not being any more of an idiot than the founding fathers were when they incorporated it into the document.
I am not a fan of the “living” document.
By the way...if you don’t think the process is completely corrupt as it stands, you are living in la la land. I believe repeal would actually reduce corruption. The sources would be more readily predicted and could be prosecuted easier.
Sorry, you also don’t make decisions regarding the Constitution based upon whether it benefits or hurts one of the political parties.
Exactly what happened at the Continental Congresses and Federal Convention that has you upset?
100% agree. Federal populism brought forth by the 17th amendment severely damaged the power of states and state governments.
The Senate was supposed to comprised of representatives of the state governments. Once the 17th took place, that was no longer the case.
There have been multiple instances where Senators have passed legislation that has direct negative effects on state governments and state budgets. See Obamacare as an example.
The Fascinating Truth About The 16th Amendment
The income tax is just an excise; capitations still require apportionment; and you've been taken to the cleaners
(excerpt) The fact is, the income tax is not only a Constitutional tax, it is also a very desirable tax. Applied in strict adherence to its statutory design, the income tax is benignly-limited in scope. It is also a fit mechanism by which those who make money from the exploitation of public resources return to the common purse a portion of their private profits.
The Fascinating Truth Versus The Comforting Myth
“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie— deliberate, contrived and dishonest— but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” John F. Kennedy
not so fast, first educate yourself instead of promulgating myths ... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3401749/posts?page=92#92
So you think keeping the 16th Amendment is a good thing?
And what myth was I supposedly promulgating?
Actually, that should be election day.
The progressive movement actually started in the 1840’s based upon ideas promulgated in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Have you not heard of the labor battles in the late 19th century. It has only grown as its growth is inevitable given democracy. It will end in tyranny as democratic movements always do. Constitutional government started to collapse with the Louisiana Purchase(There is no Constitutional authority for what Jefferson did, Marbury Vs. Madison is not covered in the Constitution)
You assume that a lack of State selection of senators Caused our collapse. It did not-look at what was elected President in 2008
What type of electorate elects a negro Community organizer from Chicago as President? What type of electorate follows Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton? YOU WANT THOSE TYPE PEOPLE SENDING REPRESENTATIVES TO A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION?????
We can’t go back as American ideas have changed. Look what was elected President in 2008.
The "living Document" argument is largely leftist. The real problem being the vanity of corrupt judges desiring to implement "Policy" rather than exercise Judgement. "Policy" is not really a judicial function as the judiciary is not organized for "Policy" decisions.
I do not want anyone touching our Constitution as it is always possible a real Judge or two could be appointed. For God's sake look at what was elected President by the electorate. Vast numbers are following Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. Do you really want that human offal electing delegates to a Constitutional convention???? You want that garbage fingering and licking our Constitution?
The "living Document" argument is largely leftist. The real problem being the vanity of corrupt judges desiring to implement "Policy" rather than exercise Judgement. "Policy" is not really a judicial function as the judiciary is not organized for "Policy" decisions.
I do not want anyone touching our Constitution as it is always possible a real Judge or two could be appointed. For God's sake look at what was elected President by the electorate. Vast numbers are following Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. Do you really want that human offal electing delegates to a Constitutional convention???? You want that garbage fingering and licking our Constitution?
The feds are already doing anything they want to do.
That’s why we need a Constitutional Convention.
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.