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 ...
That still won’t change what they would do.
The states’ interest would be to get as much money from the Feds as possible.
No, it wouldn’t. You’re talking about something completely different. In the 1960s, SCOTUS ordered state legislative bodies redistricted to reflect population, not per county as it often used to be. You’d have to alter that via Constitutional Amendment, and that wouldn’t get a single vote because it would be seen as mass disenfranchisement of urban dwellers (left-wingers). However, changing it to reflect population has proven a travesty, where now one or two urban Democrat counties can overrule the desires of the entirety of a given state. Most egregiously in states like Delaware, IL, MI, NV, OR, PA, VA, WI.
That sounds like the Governor's Councils found in some states.
They don't have much power or visibility, but they do give eccentrics a chance to run for office without doing much harm.
I don't think the writer's plan would work. It would do a lot to remove a check on the power of the House and the President.
Sorry your wrong. I said counties just for the ease of providing a conceptual understanding. It doesn’t matter if it’s counties or districts. The fact remains that places like Pa have both houses of gov controlled by rural areas but state wide elections go to the Dems because of the population bases in urban areas. If the Pa house and senate selected our Senators we would have 2 GOP senators and always would have 2 GOP senators.
Mr. Status Quo has chimed in. Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments NOW!
No, it did work, that is why the Progressives of the era wanted it(state selected senators) changed.
If I ran things being against the repeal of the 17th amendment would be grounds for zot.
I’m sorry, I misunderstood what you said the first time. I know that PA would elect 2 Republicans at the present time because they have a majority in the legislature. But neither would be Conservatives. They’d be Shuster types.
Only a true historical idiot would defend the 17th amendment.
You can shout it as loud as you want, I agree on the 16th, but not on the 17th. It didn’t work for the reasons I’ve outlined countless times.
Although VA would not at present have the two execrable Communist Senators under an instant repeal, you’d have two RINOs instead like Eric Cantor and Tom Davis. But you’d never get a Conservative.
Compliments will get you everywhere, Sugarplum.
I would think that ANYTHING would be better than what we have now which is an out of touch oligarchical Senate. It seems a common thread that progressives, like you, love centralized power. A dictatorial fetish is a very unpopular trait to exhibit on a website called "FREE REPUBLIC".
Corrupt or statist, take your pick. I wouldn’t want my legislature electing MY Senators and we have a GOP supermajority. Those running around talking about repealing the 17th as a great idea have little to no clue about the subject as to why it was implemented in the first place let alone how it would work in today’s climate. But the only thing you’re cheering for here is empowering politicians at a time when they need their power drastically lessened.
The VA Senate would produce two very conservative Senators if tasked with electing Senators. You are so full of it.
I don’t defend the status quo, nor do I defend the monstrosity in Washington. I debunk the notion that the 17th was a bad idea. I’ve offered numerous suggestions for changing the system. Changing Senators from being elected by the people to being elected by corrupt and statist legislators is no panacea. In fact, all you’ve done is turned something from bad to worse.
My first thought, was: what moron thought this up? Then I see the Washington Comoste as the source and it all became clear.
They support a dictatorial executive.
Sure the Senate has issues. Humongous issues, but WTF!
Now you’re just lying to yourself. Political establishment types dominate such contests over Conservative insurgents. And if you don’t believe that, just ask yourself how many times RINOs would join with Democrats to scuttle the Conservative agenda, let alone candidates.
Do you think if you entrusted Republican state legislators to select the Presidential nominee, would you have gotten Trump or El Jebbe ? You know full well the answer to that.
Are you mentally infirmed? Earth to FMDJ - YOU ARE DEFENDING THE STATUS QUO. Seek help.
Your progressive slip is showing. Next you will be defending the income tax over tariffs and a NRST.
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.