"A Betrayal" - Some advice for Bush on campaign-finance reform legislation.

The National Review ^ | February 20, 2002 | National Review Editors

[Magnum44]

Thank you both. I see your points and I tend to agree, though I would have to consider the arguments for the amendment in the first place to fully understand the impact.

However, I believe the reality is that, the repeal of any amendment to the constitution is beyond the reach of any single president (let alone in less than 2 years). So I find Lazamataz's conditionals on voting for GW, in the event he were to sign a CFR bill, to be unrealistic and again your position is predisposed without consideration of what the Courts or other future events may bring.

[Fabozz]

"I still do not see how repeal of the 17th Amendment affects that."

The electorate as a whole doesn't care all that much about federalism—subtle points of political theory are lost on the average voter, and even on the average legislator. But politicians know when they gain or lose power, and they prefer the former to the latter. If senators were selected by the state legislatures directly, the entire mission of the senate would be to preserve or increase the power of state governments. Every senator judges bills based on how they affect his constituency (and thus his chances for reelection). Make that constituency a state's government rather than its electorate, and you make the senator a rabid federalist as a practical matter, even if he doesn't know what the word itself means.

Furthermore, a small body of political sophisticates like a state legislature is more trustworthy in some ways than a large body of indifferent and uninformed voters. The state legislature would be more likely to remember the senator's misdeeds six years down the road, and less likely to be swayed by demagoguery. Obviously we can't leave government exclusively to the elites (which is why we still need the House of Representatives), but we are a representative republic—taking some decisions out of the hands of the plebs and putting them in the hands of people selected for their ability and willingness to shoulder the responsibility is a cornerstone of American democracy.

[Magnum44]

Thanks again. What was the motivation behind the 17th amendment to begin with? Why did the states go along with it?

[Fabozz]

There's an excellent article on the subject here. Here's the short answer: The 17th Amendment was backed by the Progressives and the left wing of the Republican Party (such as "The Bull Moose," Teddy Roosevelt) to "end the dominance of party 'bosses' and the state 'machines,' stamp out the undue influence of special interests in the Senate, make it more responsive to the will of the people, and of course, eliminate, or greatly reduce, the execrable practice of spending large sums of money to get elected." I'll leave it to you to draw parallels between that and Shays-Meehan. ;-)

[plain talk]

You're right. This thread is interesting. It demonstrates one of the greatest challenges we have as conservatives - to keep from eating our own in emotional tirades.

[counterrevolutionary]

Much like John Lennon's "Imagine", noble but not realistic.

Actually, the world described in "Imagine" is neither noble nor realistic.

[Howlin]

Are you saying you voted for Bush?

[Howlin]

I'm sure glad you're one of the adults.

[mountaineer]

"Cultists" and "Bushbots"? Gee, glad to see no hyperbole on your part.

[1 FELLOW FREEPER]

I voted for George senior the first time, not the second, after he lied about taxes.In 92 I did not vote for president. I voted for Dubya this time. I will the next time if he doesn't sign this bill, and if he does something about illegal immigration.

[Howlin]

not the second, after he lied about taxes.In 92 I did not vote for president

That's at least two people on this very thread that say they didn't vote for Bush in '92.

You have to accept YOUR part in the last eight years. Quite being so pious about George W. Bush.

[rightwing2]

More and more I think this is a replay of stem cell research. Bush is keeping his power dry and talking to advisors who know exactly what they are doing. In the last two days I've come to the conclusion that Bush is taking exactly the right steps, including the delliberately leaked ambiguity to contribute to defeat of this bill in the Senate.

If that fails, I expect Bush to veto the bill, and ask for time on TV to tell the American people exactly why this bill is an assault on the Constitution and deserved to be vetoed. He will couple that with a demand that Congress go right back to work and pass an honest campaign reform bill that applies NOW, in this election. The general reaction of most people will be, like on stem cell research,"Now there's a leader I can respect." And Congress, having been painted into a corner, will have to pass a bill that DOES meet Bush's six criteria.

As I stated to a similarly minded Freeper, my post #58 is for you. As for your touting of Bush much vaunted stem-cell decision to allow continued federal funding of aborted baby stem-cell research, that was an absolute betrayal of the pro-life cause that was roundly condemned by the majority of pro-life!! How can you cite as a cause for respect, a President who states over and over again that he is against federal funding of aborted baby stem-cell research and then addresses all Americans and tells them he is overturning his temporary ban on this evil practice? The fact that you cite that as an example of Bush's supposed committment to conservative principles merely tends to show that you are not a conservative or at least not a pro-life conservative.

[MassExodus]

I can't believe that Bush is EVEN CONSIDERING signing this bill !

I hope it's just smoke and mirrors or he has some kind of a plan ( please tell me he does ).

If Bush signs that un-Constitutional piece of garbage I won't just NOT vote for a Republican again,

I will do everything in my power to defeat them ( us ) in the feature.

[MassExodus]

Quite being so pious about George W. Bush.

Excuse US !

Listen up lady, EVERYBODY who is a American has the right, no DUTY to be critical of a guy

who hasn't yet smacked this un-Constitutional Piece of Garbage right back in the face of the Socialists who spawned it.

If Bush signs "C F R" as it is written, he will have declared himself an enemy of the Constitution and therefore, would need to be impeached.

Yes, I'm dead serious.

[concerned about politics]

If Bush signs "C F R" as it is written, he will have declared himself an enemy of the Constitution and therefore, would need to be impeached.

Bush hasn't signed it. Get ahold of yourself man!!! Get a grip!!!

[concerned about politics]

“A Betrayal”

There IS NO betrayal. Bush hasn't even seen the damn thing yet!
At this point, he is an innocent man!!

[hchutch]

Look, maybe you don't get it. There is a way to do the right thing without pushing people over a cliff.

Sorry, but frontal banzai charges into the teeth of a waiting enemy (which the Dems and media are) do not work, and cost way too much. Better to kill this thing in a way that can take the issue off the table, if possible.

The stem cell decision was not perfect, but it was the best one could do, especially since I do not see 51 pro-life votes in the Senate, much less competent leadership there that could make use of them. Sadly, the same holds true here. We have enough to sustain a veto if we fight smart.

You need to get a grip and think with your head as opposed to other items.

[Congressman Billybob]

Either you do not understand the President's order on stem cell research, or you are one of those fire-breathers who will hack to death a politician who agrees with you 95% and thereby install in office a politician who agrees with you 0%.

Politics is the art of the possible. Campus bull sessions where you play the PPG game, "President, Pope and God," are where you "apply" pure theory to the real world. I grew out of that halfway through college, 39 years ago. I recommend that you give it a try.

And don't assume you know my views generally from the specifics I post on on any FR thread. I say what I mean, and mean what I say, on the subject at hand. As other things come up, I'll address them.

I will say this: The driving force in my life is the Constitution, the people who wrote it, and the people now who are required to enforce it. That's why my first question about anyone running for President or Senate is, "What kind of judges and Justices will this person appoint or confirm?"

It's a lonely task, because most people do not think forty years down the road ahead (the life span on the bench of the average judge appointed for life). And most do not think 200 years down the road behind us. As I say when asked about my clients, "Most of my clients died 200 years ago.

In the long haul I am the best friend that any "true conservative" who believes in the Constitution, ever had. And that includes you, always, regardless of what you think of me, or say about me.

Congressman Billybob

Phil & Billybob in the mornings.

Billybob on the Net, new column up now.

[concerned about politics]

You don't think he's going to sign it either, do you? He's going to send it back for repairs.