Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Torie
If it will never happen, we don't know. If the right type of charismatic pols start making persuasive and appealing arguments for it, it could very quickly become an issue.

Certainly, unless some effort is made at making it an issue, it will never happen.

As to this:

They would start pumping their money into state legislative elections, thereby spreading their corruption national influence into more local elections.
It becomes harder to demagogue issues on the local level, because the people involved tend to be known by more of those involved. But your argument is that it would spread corruption (expanding it). Yet clearly, their corrupt influence was augmented by the move to direct elections. Unless you are saying that every time it would change from indirect to direct or vice versa it would increase the currupt influence, I fail to see how the evidence supports that view.

We put this in to minimize corruption and the influence of special interests. Instead, both increased exponentially. Removing what we put in is unlikely to cause more of an increase, and may very well help quell the tide.

159 posted on 06/23/2002 3:37:42 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies ]


To: Dales
I think there was quite a time gap between the enactment of the 17th amendment and the alleged corruption, suggesting perhaps other sources of causation.
172 posted on 06/23/2002 3:56:27 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson