Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Don't like the 17th amendment? Blame Theodore Roosevelt
PGA Weblog ^

Posted on 05/28/2012 11:45:53 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica

In a book titled "Progressive Principles", which is a collection of Roosevelt's speeches, (and which Roosevelt himself endorsed, see the preface) Roosevelt made clear his favor for the direct election of senators: (Page 3 - April 3rd, 1912)

For this purpose we believe in securing for the people the direct election of United States Senators exactly as the people have already secured in actual practice the direct election of the President.

Page 65: (February 21st, 1912)

I believe in the election of United States Senators by direct vote.

Page 315: (August 17th, 1912 - Bull Moose platform)

In particular, the party declares for direct primaries for the nomination of State and National officers, for Nation-wide preferential primaries for candidates for the Presidency, for the direct election of United States Senators by the people; and we urge on the States the policy of the short ballot, with responsibility to the people secured by the initiative, referendum, and recall.

As an aside note, I'd bet that many people didn't realize that all of these things were originally a part of the progressive program. All of this makes sense, when you consider the massive amounts of propaganda that progressives were putting out back in those days, and do still to this day.

There are a lot of people who will do a lot of hating on Woodrow Wilson for all of the things that were done on his watch(and almost the entirety of it is rightfully deserved. See my archives, I've probably posted about Wilson more than any other), but it's long been forgotten in far too many quarters that much of Wilson's program was either an extension of Roosevelt's or was the direct implementation of it.

At the time that these speeches of his were being given, the 17th would've been making it's way through state legislatures.

Now, it's true that there may have been more consistent voices out there agitating toward the implemtation of direct senatorial election, in particular, William Jennings Bryan. But as a former President, Roosevelt's voice would've been a powerful affirmative voice toward it's implementation given his popularity. And as the leader of the progressive party, Roosevelt's position on the matter should not be forgotten.


TOPICS: Education
KEYWORDS: progressingamerica

1 posted on 05/28/2012 11:46:06 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RichardMoore; Graewoulf; Little Ray; Madame Dufarge; Eye of Newt; AdvisorB; HOYA97; Klemper; ...
If anybody wants on/off the revolutionary progressivism ping list, send me a message

Progressives do not want to discuss their own history. I want to discuss their history.

2 posted on 05/28/2012 11:48:31 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica (What's the best way to reach a you tube generation? Put it on you tube!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Senators should represent the interests of their states and not the masses.


3 posted on 05/28/2012 12:01:17 PM PDT by greatvikingone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica
Section. 3.

Clause 1: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, ....

4 posted on 05/28/2012 12:02:57 PM PDT by bsdsan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

It was a sad day when the Roosevelt family immigrated to this country.


5 posted on 05/28/2012 12:09:59 PM PDT by bkopto (Obama and Biden merely symptoms of a more profound, systemic disease in American body politic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Democracy eventually kills. Lots. Every time.


6 posted on 05/28/2012 12:18:10 PM PDT by Jacquerie (No court will save us from ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

My only problem with the 17th is that it never passed. Total fraud.


7 posted on 05/28/2012 12:20:47 PM PDT by Goreknowshowtocheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

What Lincoln started Roosevelt finished.


8 posted on 05/28/2012 12:22:55 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

I am not from SC but does anyone think SC legislature would pick Goober Graham for Senator? I lived in Chas. SC for 4 years it is a very conservative state.


9 posted on 05/28/2012 12:24:50 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica
The Seventeenth Amendment is an abomination.

I actually think that Teddy Roosevelt wasn't right in the head (I believe many of his contemporaries felt the same way.)

Also think that it should be illegal for states' congressional delegation to receive any out-of-state funding.

10 posted on 05/28/2012 12:33:26 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bsdsan
true...go back to the source...
The Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights
(not the EU...or French...Sweden.. Swiss... Belgians.. et. al... not some flavor on the month)
...permit no short-cuts to European socialism..Fabianism. :-\

11 posted on 05/28/2012 12:36:22 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass (WA. DC E$tabli$hment; DNC/RNC/Unionists...Brazilian saying: "$@me Old $hit; different flie$". :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bsdsan

The 17th basically affirmed the rapid decline of federalism, all in the name of “populism.” Essentially, a majority of States could then supersede another’s Legislative actions.

If any State wanted popular election of their Senators (or outright appointment by the Governor, or one from each branch, or whatever), that was always possible w/o this amendment...


12 posted on 05/28/2012 12:54:25 PM PDT by mikrofon (Constitution BUMP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Wasn’t Teddy a spoiler in the election that gave America Woodrow Wilson, in much the same way Ross Perot gave America the Clintons?


13 posted on 05/28/2012 1:06:00 PM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikrofon

How would that work if the compact agreed to and ratified by the states says:

“Clause 1: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, ....”


14 posted on 05/28/2012 1:08:59 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bkopto

Yup. He ran as a severe conservative and took a hard left in office.


15 posted on 05/28/2012 1:16:40 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Interesting post. If you want to liven things up a bit, ping BlackElk. I tangled with him last week on the subject of 17th amendment, when discussing out of state interests and money getting senators elected to represent interests not of their own state.

He considers himself a conservative, but supports the direct election of senators and thinks the progressive movement isn’t all bad.


16 posted on 05/28/2012 1:17:30 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica; greatvikingone; BlackElk

Interesting post. If you want to liven things up a bit, ping BlackElk. I tangled with him last week on the subject of 17th amendment, when discussing out of state interests and money getting senators elected to represent interests not of their own state.

He considers himself a conservative, but supports the direct election of senators and thinks the progressive movement isn’t all bad.


17 posted on 05/28/2012 1:19:46 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US

Might could look at it that way, except Ross Perot did not throw the election to the Clintons, although the moderate republicans like to explain their failures that way.

By the way, the other guy in that election, Taft, also supported the constitutional Amendment creating the Federal Income Tax. What was Taft’s position on creation of a private central bank called the Federal Reserve? And the 17th Amendment? Or did he even have a campaign promise out there dealing with the fed and the 17th?


18 posted on 05/28/2012 1:25:49 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ngat

Of course Ross Perot threw the election to the Clintons. It’s a question of arithmetic. Clinton did not have the ability to reach 50%. Period. In a 2-person race, Clinton was a sure loser.

You don’t/didn’t like Bush, fine. You voted for Perot, fine. That was certainly your right.

But don’t try to fudge the arithmetic. Clinton was locked into less than 50%. Without Ross Perot, no President Clinton. It’s simple arithmetic.

(Or are you one of those who believe that if the party says that 2 + 2 = 5, then 2 + 2 really does equal 5?)


19 posted on 05/28/2012 1:32:15 PM PDT by samtheman (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2888480/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ngat
"chosen by the Legislature thereof, ....”

If your unicameral State Legislature wants to rubber-stamp a Governor's recommendation, say, or your State House selects one member while the local Senate the other, I as a New Yorker should have no say in the process.

As a citizen, this might be another consideration (as with Entitlement policies or immigration laws) regarding relocation to a friendlier region.

20 posted on 05/28/2012 1:36:08 PM PDT by mikrofon (Constitution BUMP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

Our elite Republcrats still being able to elect their own Rebublicrats? What could go wrong?


21 posted on 05/28/2012 2:08:30 PM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
Wasn’t Teddy a spoiler in the election that gave America Woodrow Wilson, in much the same way Ross Perot gave America the Clintons?

Yes -- the ill-fated Bull Moose Party. Teddy and Richard Nixon are the two biggest Republican disappointments of the twentieth century. They ran as arch-conservatives and governed as liberals.

22 posted on 05/28/2012 2:42:35 PM PDT by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

The direct election of Senators destroyed the Senate, and created two Houses.

I am a firm believer that the 17th amendment stuck a dagger in the First Republic.


23 posted on 05/28/2012 3:30:59 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BfloGuy
I gotta disagree! Papa & Son Bush will go down as the "Presidents of Missed Opportunity"

They had the chance to restore much of the Founders' vision and they wimped out. Especially G.W. with support in Congress available to him. Shame he lost his veto pen and tried to "make nice" with treasonous Kennedy. Sigh.

24 posted on 05/28/2012 3:33:47 PM PDT by Thom Pain (U.S. Constitution is a CONTRACT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Thom Pain
Shame he lost his veto pen and tried to "make nice" with treasonous Kennedy. Sigh.

Well, there's certainly an argument to be made there. And while I think of Nixon's creating the EPA, I'm reminded of Bush's Department of Homeland Security, so I can't disagree.

25 posted on 05/28/2012 4:54:36 PM PDT by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Of course Ross Perot did not cost George Bush the election in 1992. Here is a very complete analysis that shows why.

http://www.leinsdorf.com/perot.htm

If it makes you happy to go on believing the myth, go ahead.

Perhaps a better question is, would George H.W. Bush, had he won, been able to advance the cause of Progressivism more than Bill Clinton was able to during his term in office?


26 posted on 05/28/2012 5:02:06 PM PDT by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ProgressingAmerica

When politicians were more accountable, this may have worked. Nowadays I think we generally get a better result if people vote for their senstors.

Put it another way I am not for having unelected, less accountable, senators. Another group of politicians who don’t have to care if what they are doing is whatcmost citizens of the state want.

Think about how responsive democrat senators are to republican constituents. Now think if they will care more, or even less, if they are appointed by the state powers. Tell me anywhere in government where appointed people feel they answer to voters.


27 posted on 05/28/2012 5:26:05 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BfloGuy

“And while I think of Nixon’s creating the EPA, I’m reminded of Bush’s Department of Homeland Security, so I can’t disagree.”

Funny how the miscreants in the GOP-E forget these little tidbits, huh ?

The battle isn’t -R vs. -D, the battle is Commie Left vs. Patriotic Right. Always has been, always will be.


28 posted on 05/28/2012 5:57:50 PM PDT by Absolutely Nobama (The Doomsday Clock is at 11:58:59......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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