I don't know about that.
Jesus Christ: You can't impeach Him and He ain't gonna resign.
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 ...
Perfect summary of the problem.
How do you fix this?
Trump will end up being a great president but the next one who is bad will have this same unlimited power, I assume.
I suggest three changes: (1) like you, repeal the 17th Amendment, (2) Eliminate the need for 2nd Senator from each state...just go with one, and (3) eliminate any connection of the Senate to the budget.
The only basic functions that I think the Senate ought to be covering: approving cabinet officers for the President, voting up or down on treaties, approving court appointees, and impeachment situations.
If we did these....then you wouldn’t have the whole Senate behaving like lobbyist-controlled nutcases.
Section I
The seventeenth amendment is hereby repealed.Section II
The several states may provide by law the means by which their senators may be removed or replaced.Section III
No person shall be a senator for more than two consecutive terms.Section IV
All Senators shall be paid by their respective states according to such wages as that State may set; they shall receive no remuneration from the federal government.
“... no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”
Actually, it worked fine.
All Senators are now are what members of the House are: only they face election less frequently, often exhibit greater job security being even more removed from those who vote for them, and are even MORE useless as a direct result.
The problems encountered with the first system are nothing compared to enduring these undisciplined, spendthrift loons we endure today BECAUSE the States are no longer the actual Partys represented as they ought to be.
You can implement anything you wish, but it’s not going to change the quality or the agenda of those elected. From Democrat states, you’ll have unencumbered Stalinists looting the treasury. From Republican states, you’ll have unencumbered RINO statists looting the treasury. You won’t get any Conservative Senators except by accident, and they’ll be swiftly removed.
Post #37 & #47.
Of course they were under no legal obligation to step down before the end of their six year term, why would they? it’s in the Constitution. Have you ever heard of a Senator step down now after their state switches to another party? The Senate was there to represent the states, it now only represents political parties and the corruption is now easier.
Actually, there was one income tax — 3 percent, if I remember correctly - imposed during the Civil War. This one was repealed sometime afterward. Then another income tax was imposed later on in the 19th Century. This one was overturned by the Supreme Court, because the tax was considered a capitation on some forms of income (not allowed without apportionment) and an excise on other forms of income (allowed). The 16th Amendment allowed all forms of income to be taxed without apportionment.
As I recall, a 1912 bribery scandal from Illinois — where else? — pushed the Amendment over the finish line for ratification.
Really, do you think “Statesmen” are produced by this present system?
Rather, the Senate HAD Statesmen and subsequent to the 17th the traditions that encouraged them steadily eroded till we have this lot. They get worse, not better.
To paraphrase: With Statesmen like these who needs useless knaves and fools?
To the last comments I will add that the “elitist parasites” you’d get have their job only because they keep the “elitist parasites” in the State legislatures happy.
You know, people whose job prospects aren’t nearly so secure because they aren’t individually so removed from most of their electorate as a US Senator presently is?
The old saying about fooling people applies: it is one thing to fool a large body of strangers (statewide no less) about who you really are but another entirely to fool your peer, the people who actually know you.
Just when we thought this election cycle couldn’t get any more bizarre....
Funny they’ve only noticed just now, when Obama is leaving, and its possible that trump could become president, that the executive branch can abuse its power through imperial edicts, er, I mean “executive actions”
How conveeeeenient.
I don't know about that.
Jesus Christ: You can't impeach Him and He ain't gonna resign.
It's the same reason why the anti-17thers can't explain why all those wonderful state-legislature appointed U.S. Senators enacted the 16th amendment (federal income tax) back in 1913, BEFORE popularly elected Senators, if they were supposedly serving "state interests" back then and wouldn't DREAM of imposing some horrible federal mandate on the states.
The answer, of course, is that these state legislatures just aren't the "vision of the founding fathers" utopia that Mark Levin claims they are. Many are as bad or WORSE than the federal government. Hence, the reason the 17th amendment was created in the first place.
I think you’re referring to William Lorimer. Though this sort of thing was rampant by then.
I think statesmen CAN be produced by the current system, but certainly not by returning to the prior system with its rampant corruption. The desire to have Henry Clays, John C. Calhouns and Daniel Websters won’t make it so. I’d rather modify who CAN vote. Universal suffrage is too close to direct democracy. Voting should be a privilege, not a right, and should fall on those with skin in the game, not parasites bleeding the nation dry.
Occasionally. The legendary "Mr. Republican" Bob Taft became Senator under the current system of direct elections, for example. (his portrait hangs on the Senate wall along side such greats as Daniel Webster) He was a fantastic leader in the 40s and 50s. I wish he had become President instead of Ike.
>> Rather, the Senate HAD Statesmen and subsequent to the 17th the traditions that encouraged them steadily eroded till we have this lot. They get worse, not better. <<
Most of the "statesmen" produced by the old system were around prior to the civil war. The Senators it produced during the Woodrow Wilson era (immediately prior to the ratification of the 17th) were a disgraceful lot, and even more corrupt and sleazy than the current crop of U.S. Senators. Becoming U.S. Senator through bribes and backroom deals was the norm in the early 20th century.
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.