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

Skip to comments.

The Senate, the President, and Judges (Seventeenth Amendment, nation hostage to despotic rule)
conservativeviewsandforum ^ | 6/20/01 | conservativeviewsandforum

Posted on 02/15/2003 6:31:11 AM PST by TLBSHOW

The Senate, the President, and Judges

The Seventeenth Amendment in giving Senators the power to by- pass state interests and pander to citizen constituency interests only heightens and hastens the march to socialism. Our nation has different interests as has been explained previously and to remain a republic we must have separate powers looking after those interests.

Essentially our type of rule is three governments in one consisting of three branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, each with different responsibilities. To suppose equality between them, each having the same equal powers is no truer than the so-called equality of people working together in the pursuit of some goal. The only equality is the right to pursue the goal; and in that pursuit each will be required to do different things; and each will have different responsibilities. So it is with the three branches of government.

The president is the representative all the people (regardless of politics or other belief) of the whole nation. Each House member represents the people of a given district in a state. Next the Supreme Court is the representative of the law and the Constitution. And the senators represent the state interests as was stated in a previous essay. Though each one has different duties, the responsibility and the goal is to ensure freedom and liberty by protecting the people from excess by any one or two of the three. When none of the three protect us from the excesses of government, we then have severe problems with maintaining our republic. That brings us back to the Senate and direct election.

Elbridge Gerry, 213 years ago argued during the Constitutional Convention against the direct election of U.S. senators by the people and warned, "The people have two great interests, the landed interest, and the commercial, including the stockholders. To draw both branches from the people will leave no security to the latter interest; the people being chiefly composed of the landed interest, and erroneously supposing that the other interests are adverse to it [that is, that they tend to embrace the Marxist notion that the rich despise and exploit them]." The Senate is to protect the interest of the wealthy and the rich which may leave many with their mouths hanging open as they read this. When Senators excoriate the rich and wealthy for being rich and wealthy they are guilty of nonfeasance (failure to do what duty requires to be done i.e. not looking after the interests of their respective states.) Party affiliation makes no difference and that then includes nearly all of the so-called wise ones making them guilty as charged.

James Madison recognized the dangers in exposing the system to an equal but separate type of power for everyone (direct election). He said, "No agrarian [socialist] attempts have yet been made in this country; but symptoms of a leveling spirit ... have sufficiently appeared in a certain quarter to give notice of the future danger. The direct election has created an equality of power situation, if not a wedding of two of the three powers to the detriment of the nation. Those powers are the Supreme Court and the Senate.

The Constitution in Article II, Section 2, clause 2, reads, He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. The advice and consent on judges of the Supreme court is the issue at hand and provides the wedding of the Senate and the Court, brought about by the XVII Amendment as will be seen in the next week’s article.

The Senate members in all of their supposed wisdom do not understand their duties, much less the entire Constitution. That is painfully obvious when they speak and write. Their duties are advice and consent with nothing more and nothing less. The word advice causes a bit of a problem but the definition of it is to give opinion and on that they fall short of understanding. They think their duty is to dictate to the President what person is sent or who is not sent for consent. The duty they have is part of the balance to protect the Constitution, not an exercise in choosing those with the proper socialist ideology, which they favor.

Every President takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. It is his sworn duty to send to the Senate nominees for the Supreme Court who are well grounded and well versed in the United States Constitution in all respects. Those nominated are not to have an agenda other than ruling by the words contained in the document to stop or prevent unconstitutional acts by the other two branches or states when called upon to do so. Conversely, if the President does not send qualified nominees, the Senate is within its power to give advice and refuse their consent. That happened when FDR tied to pack the court with his cronies so that his socialist agenda would have legal backing. (Being shut off from a scheme to regulate farm products during the depression, FDR tried to load the court with cronies to make an end run against the Constitution. That would have forged an unholy alliance destructive to every freedom we have.)

Now what is advice? It is simply a message to the President to send those who understand the Constitution and will follow it; then and only then can they give consent. Advice and consent is one of the checks on presidential power that would become too great if not reigned in by the refusal to give consent. The Senate stopped FDR with Article II as they were supposed to do.

With the power usurpation by the Senate, the nation is now hostage to a despotic rule that the founders never intended but knew could happen. That is obvious when the federal papers James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay and now the worst fears of the founders have crawled out of the closet. With direct election of Senators the power of the President has been diminished and the power of both the Supreme Court and Senate enhanced unbalancing the powers and destroying separation.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: 17thamendment; judges; president; senate; seventeenthamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last
Why The Senate Wants Control © 6-27-01

A symbiotic relationship has come into play between the Senate and the Supreme Court and it bodes nothing but ill to the welfare of the nation. What the socialist minds could not bring about through legislation, the Court is providing with its decisions. That forms the basis for the illegitimate symbiotic actions of the two branches.

Liberal, anti-constitution control of the Senate is necessary for the liberals to bring about a complete socialization of the nation. As James Madison explained, "we must be on guard for the leveling spirit" now known as equality, the very heart of socialism. The founders very wisely separated and limited the powers of each branch to prevent such an occurrence, yet it is being destroyed as I write this piece.

Article II, Section 2, clause 2 gives the exclusive power to the President to appoint judges to the Supreme Court (inferior court judges also) who will follow the Constitution. That is where the problem is now occurring in the recalcitrant, liberal dominated house of wisdom. Sticking to the facts, personalities and party aside, the President said he would appoint strict constructionist of the Constitution to the bench, such as Justices Scalia and Thomas. That sent the opposition into extreme fits of hysteria and demagoguery since that type of appointee would wreck their plans to control the agenda for collectivization of the nation. With their plans headed for the trash heap it is much easier to understand Jim Jeffords becoming an independent. Categorically, it makes no difference what party Jeffords claims as his political home since he refuses to uphold the Constitution. His votes in congress are proof of the statement. All the change has done is to make it easier for the Senate to control the liberal agenda and ignore the Constitution.

The Jeffords switch in giving control to the Democrats is similar in operation to the parliamentary type government when one government is abandoned and a new one takes shape changing the power structure. Granted that the President and the House are the same but there is a power switch with different people installed in power positions, which changes the make-up and agenda priorities for good or for bad. In effect Jeffords did what the people had not done in the fall election when he handed the Senate to the liberals. The notion of symbiosis comes even closer to reality.

The national media, either clueless, dupes, or engaging in something more sinister, continue to talk about winners and losers in the struggle over the Senate plums. They speak about the President’s agenda being the loser and the others possibly being the winners. To them it is a contest and they seem to enjoy what they perceive as fun and games, all the while ignoring the trashing of the Constitution. (As an aside, the McCain campaign finance bill would leave the national media in a position of absolute dominance in being able to tout an agenda without any opposition to their Marxist leaning rhetoric.) Everyone needs to comprehend that the losers are the people of the United States as our inalienable rights of freedom and liberty are destroyed by the tyrannical rules imposed by those with an anti-United States agenda.

The statements of Senators are interesting as this scene plays out. Tom Daschle, now majority leader, continues to want to stick it to the "rich" even though his duty and that of his fellow Senators is to protect the economic interests of those who make the commerce flow. Without apologies to anyone, the socialist must destroy the "rich", the wealthy, and the successful in order to install godless socialism. Not only that but they must engage in class warfare, a classical tactic of the socialist. (Black Book of Communism, pages 48, 124) The class warfare is possible because the liberal Senate speaks the language of "hate the rich" which appeals to the human tendency to be greedy, the only remedy for such greed being a conscience in tune with God. Thus the need to destroy belief in God becomes of paramount importance as the hate line is preached.

Other Senators have weighed in on the nominee issue and they leave no doubt that they care little for the Constitution in addition to not knowing much about it either. The three cases to which I refer are statements by Chuck Schumer of New York, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, and Joe Lieberman. First Schumer said that the nominees that the President sent would not all be approved, that the Senate would have some of their own to offer. He said, "He will get some and we will get some." Excuse me Mr. Schumer, please cite the Article, Section, and clause that says the Senate has the power which you claim for your self. The attitude he exhibits in that statement is all-important to their control of the nation.

Next comes Patrick Leahy, new Judiciary Chairman, who told White House officials, "they are going to have to look for mainstream judges. Nobody wants to see the judiciary lurch to the far right or the far left." Only a socialist could come up with such a stupid statement. First, the court cannot lurch any farther to the left than it is now given the decisions it has made. Two, Leahy has no feeling for the Constitution and equates it with hate speech called the far right. He is to be given some credit for his observation. The Constitution is far right of the position he espouses. Both Schumer and Leahy should have said is that they want nominees who respect the Constitution and the rule of law. Instead hey want litmus tests so they can weed out those (strict constructionist) who will not sing the party line song of activists who will install socialism. Their oaths of office were a lie and their statements on this matter are proof of it.

Joe Lieberman of Connecticut gets the prize for ignorance of the Constitution. Arlen Spector said he would introduce a change in the rules to prevent a Senate member from changing the make-up of the Senate organization. Mr. Lieberman said, "With all respect to Arlen, I think the rule change is unconstitutional," It is amazing how those things, which impede the liberal agenda, are unconstitutional and those things, which would follow the constitution, are ignored. For Senator Lieberman’s edification he should read Article I, Section 5, clause 2: Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member. If the rule that Senator Spector proposes is not part of the rules for proceedings, then why has the Senate all these years been organizing committees, assigning duties, and delegating authority to committee chairman?

Since Mr. Lieberman wants to be ultra constitutional, there is not one word about organizing along party or ideological lines. To Senator Lieberman that proposed rule has to be unconstitutional because it would jeopardize the control of the Senate and thwart the hoped for manipulation of the Supreme Court and the lower courts. The grand plans for socialization through activist courts would be slowed if not brought to a stop. Party and ideology is a product of the people and not the Constitution. For Mr. Lieberman’s information the only ideology that he should hold is for the limited government that the Constitution tells him is necessary to ensure freedom and liberty.

Control of the Senate is important if they are going to continue the march to Marxism. And with the direct election for the Senate, the people are the unwitting helpers in their scheme, the voters thinking they are exercising an independent voice, when in fact they are tightening the noose around their collective necks.

1 posted on 02/15/2003 6:31:12 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Thank you for the article and your remarks; printed and on the breakfast table this morning for further reading.

As you say..."but will they keep the Republic?
you're damn right we will!
But "how?" she asks in a small voice............

2 posted on 02/15/2003 6:46:33 AM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
sorry I have not made remarks yet I left off the link to that important part.... once you get to the source there is a back and forewatd to the whole story, we are in deep trouble if nothing is done to stop the Senate!

http://www.conservativeviewsandforum.com/Why_Senate_Wants_Page_13.htm
3 posted on 02/15/2003 6:49:16 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner; sirchtruth; Fred Mertz; Miss Marple; Randjuke; Redleg Duke; gonzo; Vinnie; ...
Any thoughts on this major major problem we face with the Senate?
4 posted on 02/15/2003 6:54:15 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
The US Constitution was intended to be a contract or compact among three parties - the federal government, the people of the states and the states. The federal government was represented by the President, the people by the directly elected House of Representatives and the states by the legislative appointments to the Senate. The Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights confirms this concept as does the mechanism known as the Electoral College in the election of the President. The concept of balance of powers applies not only to the branches of the federal government but also to the balance of powers among the parties to the Constitution.

I think the most destructive aspect of our governments is the use of federal funds to support state actions however the intent may be. The federal government by supplying such funds separates the functions of the responsibility of raising such funds from the accountability for the spending of such funds. There can be nothing more destructive for good government.

5 posted on 02/15/2003 7:15:37 AM PST by monocle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marajade
your thoughts on this?
6 posted on 02/15/2003 7:16:38 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
I don't think the comments by Gerry over-rule the words and procedures of the Constitution and the Senate itself. Therefore calls to have the Senate represent Commercial or Moneyed interests are out of place.

I would be happy with old State appointment. That alone would be enough to lift the pliebisitory nature of the Senators. What we need is the deliberative representation that allows independence and cool heads in that body. Right now, they are more driven by political whim and popular mood than the House...a real reversal. That situation then extends to keeping their seat by voting benefits for those wanting government to take and take.

7 posted on 02/15/2003 7:19:19 AM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Pretty telling that when here lies the problems we face and no one cares! Oh well....the road to Socialist America is being traveled down and there seems to be nothing that can stop it from the lack of respones to this thread!
8 posted on 02/15/2003 7:39:14 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
BUMP for the article and I couldn't agree more! It's given me an idea for a new graphic. I've added a link to my FR homepage. Check it out.
9 posted on 02/15/2003 8:02:32 AM PST by Xthe17th (FREE THE STATES. Repudiate the 17th amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
I am not certain the lack of responses is indicative of dis-interest. I think it is an indication that many of us agree and are saddened and frustrated by such truths, and we realize there is nothing we can do about it. The current system most likely will have to "break", before REAL change back to our Constitutional form of government ever happens.

However, I am somewhat hopeful. If the powerful modern Soviet Union could be disbanded without serious bloodshed, perhaps there is hope for America to shed it's socialist nonsense as well some day. But like the Soviet Union, things are going to have to get much worse than now before the communists are routed.

10 posted on 02/15/2003 8:59:14 AM PST by Bob Mc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW; 4ConservativeJustices; stainlessbanner; shuckmaster
That is obvious when the federal papers James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay and now the worst fears of the founders have crawled out of the closet

That's a laugh. Hamilton wanted something akin to an elected king, Clay preached it, and lincoln gave it to him. Face it the Republic is dead and has been for many years. We're living in a Socialist democracy. The 17th Amendment was the last nail in the coffin of the Republic. The sheep bow to Washington, and the 'President' has all the power. The Executive branch even has the absolute audacity to get offended when someone suggests that the power should lie in the Legislative branch.

Come look to see what the Second Revolution wrought. Thinking that allowing popular vote of the 17th Amendment would, in the end, centralize all power with one man has apparently bit the memory of Hamilton's lackeys in the tail once again. The way I see it, the Senate is taking power from the one of the only places it has left. It has been emasculated to the point that they have to fight the President for judicial nominations. And while this time I don't agree with many in the Senate on this position, at least they are trying to wrest a power out of the hands of the Executive branch. It took their power to declare war so apparently the Legislative is trying to take this power

11 posted on 02/15/2003 9:13:34 AM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
This isn't going to be a "major problem" for long. Any number of things are going to release this logjam: 1) when war starts, and the public focuses on the safety of our country and our troops, ANYONE obstructing ANYTHING will suffer the voters' wrath. Some may face recalls. 2) Some Dems will break rank, if for no other reason than their own "pork barrel" stuff will be squelched. 3) The GOP can, and will, play increasingly hard ball. Don't be surprised if Rush's suggestion to stymie all contact with Linda Daschle's lobbying firms doesn't appear. 4) IF the Dems get too uppity, Bush will make recess appointments like you wouldn't believe. 5) I'm convinced the economy will quickly come back when the war is over, and when that happens, Bush's popularity will again be at 80+ percent, and THIS TIME, I don't think he will hesitate to use the bully pulpit on these matters, tying the judges to national security.
12 posted on 02/15/2003 9:22:11 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
We need Constitutional scholars who will go into public and private schools across the land teaching our young just what their Constitution means and how we use and abuse it. Until we get to the children and those in high school today or ASAP, this country doesn’t really stand a chance to remain anything close to a Republic.

Along with the elite FDR liberals, the public education in this country was thrown away and in its place Social Reform and Social Engineering in many guises was instituted the results being since 1932 America has been in a battle to remain a Republic not a Socialist or sham Democracy.

Hillary Clinton was not mentioned in either article which tells me the authors are not being totally honest. Lieberman, Daschle and the rest mentioned are playing the ‘my team is better than you team’ and pandering for votes – I don’t think they are particularly astute on their Constitution, they are not that clever. Hillary on the other hand is; a more malicious, anti-American – pro Neo Marxism, never existed within our governmental House. Destroy her machine and we Americans will have achieved an enormous step in regaining the US Constitution and the Republic for which it stands. And we must take back our schools and our teachers. Looking at the mess within our government, Iraq is just a blip!

13 posted on 02/15/2003 9:33:44 AM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
TO ALL

Senator Frist needs your support, he needs to know we are aware of Tom Daschle’s determined obstruction of the Senate and the United States Constitution. Daschle, Clinton and those like him stand in contempt of the United States Constitution in violation of that document and in their oaths of office. If Senator Frist doesn’t demand all Senators do as Constitutionally instructed, then he is in violation of that document.

You can e-mail him, however a letter would be more appropriate, please do something to let him know Americans DO care and we want Steel in his Spine! Send him this article and if you haven't the time today, please take the time tomorrow.

e-mail ...
http://frist.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Office of Senator Bill Frist
416 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-3344
202-228-1264 (fax)

Office of Senator Bill Frist
28 White Bridge Road, Suite 211
Nashville, TN 37205
615-352-9411
615-352-9985 (fax)

Office of Senator Bill Frist
5100 Poplar Avenue, Suite 514
Memphis, TN 38137
901-683-1910
901-683-3610 (fax)

14 posted on 02/15/2003 10:18:00 AM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
TO ALL

Senator Frist needs your support, he needs to know we are aware of Tom Daschle’s determined obstruction of the Senate and the United States Constitution. Daschle, Clinton and those like him stand in contempt of the United States Constitution in violation of that document and in their oaths of office. If Senator Frist doesn’t demand all Senators do as Constitutionally instructed, then he is in violation of that document.

You can e-mail him, however a letter would be more appropriate, please do something to let him know Americans DO care and we expect Steel in his Spine when it comes to OUR Constitution! Send him this article. .

e-mail ...
http://frist.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Office of Senator Bill Frist
416 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-3344
202-228-1264 (fax)

Office of Senator Bill Frist
28 White Bridge Road, Suite 211
Nashville, TN 37205
615-352-9411
615-352-9985 (fax)

Office of Senator Bill Frist
5100 Poplar Avenue, Suite 514
Memphis, TN 38137
901-683-1910
901-683-3610 (fax)

15 posted on 02/15/2003 10:23:27 AM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW; Xthe17th
LINK to some earlier 17th Amendment threads
16 posted on 02/15/2003 10:24:21 AM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: yoe
BUMP
17 posted on 02/15/2003 10:36:19 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: KC Burke
thanks!
18 posted on 02/15/2003 10:36:45 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: yoe
BUMP
19 posted on 02/17/2003 6:19:00 PM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Truth bump.......
Now what is advice? It is simply a message to the President to send those who understand the Constitution and will follow it; then and only then can they give consent. Advice and consent is one of the checks on presidential power that would become too great if not reigned in by the refusal to give consent. The Senate stopped FDR with Article II as they were supposed to do.

With the power usurpation by the Senate, the nation is now hostage to a despotic rule that the founders never intended but knew could happen. That is obvious when the federal papers James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay and now the worst fears of the founders have crawled out of the closet. With direct election of Senators the power of the President has been diminished and the power of both the Supreme Court and Senate enhanced unbalancing the powers and destroying separation.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/853301/posts?page=
20 posted on 02/27/2003 6:38:53 PM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

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