Guy is a Moron, we're a republic. I'll bet Keyes will set him straight. Too many lefties want direct election so they can stuff ballots like third world tin pot dictators do.
Posted on 08/13/2004 7:28:18 PM PDT by freedom44
CHICAGO - Alan Keyes (news - web sites) said Friday he would like to end the system under which the people elect U.S. senators and return to pre-1913 practice in which senators were chosen by state legislatures.
The Republican Senate candidate in Illinois, asked about past comments on the election process, said the constitutional amendment that provided for popular election of senators upset the balance between the people and the states.
"The balance is utterly destroyed when the senators are directly elected because the state government as such no longer plays any role in the deliberations at the federal level," Keyes said at a taping of WBBM Newsradio's "At Issue" program.
He said it was one of the reasons "there has been a steady deleterious erosion of the sovereign role of the states."
Keyes' Democratic rival, state Sen. Barack Obama of Chicago, issued a statement saying he supports popular election of U.S. senators.
"I certainly trust the people of Illinois to choose who they want to represent them in the U.S. Senate," he said. "That is the very basis of our democracy."
Keyes said he did not consider repealing the 17th Amendment a high priority.
"But if I ever see an opportunity in politics to promote it, I will," he said.
Now there's a cause no one is interested in.
Mr. Keyes should challenge Mr. Obama to read the Constitution. Not that it will win the election, but it might help wake up a few people.
Read up, it seems there was some fraud around the ratification process...
..."... pre-1913 practice in which senators were chosen by state legislatures."...
That may reduce the large amount of money that is needed now to run for Senator.
Somebody should give Keyes a clue.
The Seantors used to be selected by each state's legislature. This was another attempt at seperating powers in the hopes that the people would not be able to vote themselves money (Welfare & Pork!)
The theory was also that the changing state political climate would keep any one senator from becoming too powerful (ted kennedy).
The communist/socialist managed to get this changes also.
Keyes is CORRECT!
Guy is a Moron, we're a republic. I'll bet Keyes will set him straight. Too many lefties want direct election so they can stuff ballots like third world tin pot dictators do.
Marvelous! They could choose a random name from the phone book and do better than Schumer, Kennedy, Rodham-Clinton, Feinstein, Edwards, Kerry ... shoot, I'm running out of fingers here!
I agree, Keyes is correct, now if we can take back allowing women to vote, we will never, ever, ever have another stupid democrat prez.
If Obama is smart he will make himself scarce and let Keyes destroy himself.
Regardless of the validity of the proposal... does Keyes WANT to get elected???
I mean, come on...
He may be correct, but nobody in Illinois gives a damn about that in the next 80 days.
Unfortunately not too many people actually read the Constitution anymore, much less understand it.
If you could prove that (within reason) I'd be happy to give up voting!
Fabulous idea... that Amendment was a huge mistake that removed a key Constitutional balance mechanism.
It'll go nowhere, of course, and more's the pity.
I wonder if Keyes will get 20% of the vote with idiocy like this.
Not a bad idea. Maybe ultra-liberals Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer would not be my two senators.
But I wonder if this is a smart time to bring it up?
yes they will do anything to allow 4 or 5 large states run roughshod over everyone, i havent done the calculation but it seems pretty easy with the way CA, FLA, Joisey & NY are growing, at some time in the not too distant future if you eliminate the electoral college, that 4 states might be able to make all the decisions regarding the presidency.
what people have to realize is what is going to happen if kerry wins, the very first thing, aside from running away from Iraq and sucking Chirac's u know what, is that they dems will make sure that the fairnness law goes back on the books and they will kill Rush and the right wing radio movement.
trust me, Im right.
Well there has been much written about Keyes's run being pointless since the odds of him winning are very low.
Looks like he's decided to put this run to good use in calling for a return to the original, and better, system of Senatorial selection.
LOL
I believe it's mostly single women that are the problem. Would you like to try taking the vote away from just them?
Phil Gramm, one of the best Senators of my lifetime, would never have been elected had the 17th Amendment not been in place.
Leave it to Alan to get involved in arcana, a-la- Ron Paul.
Thanks for this post. I never knew about this change in the process. Very interesting.
In 1913???? Talk about old news!
Our State Senate here in OK has been RAT since OK became a state -- no way do we want a legislature like ours picking our Senator. The party of the ethically challenged Carroll Fisher picking our Senators? I don't think so -- dumb idea especially when you have legislatures that gerrymand to stay in office.
While Keyes is certainly correct, I sorta doubt the average Chicagoan gives a rats rear end about that issue.
Perhaps he should try to connect with the people he is depending on to vote for him with some issues that get their attention.
Like crime, demorat corruption, terrorism, taxes, etc.
I agree 100%. I even tried to get my state legislator to present a bill taking away their right to drive, but he seems to think it was an odd request.
Well, in general, they are. Just look at the other Senator Illinois elected.
Do away with 17th Amendment
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b1d0a3f02e6.htm
FR CALL TO ACTION: Defacto Repeal of 17th Amendment - THREAD 2
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b116a8426d7.htm
Repeal 17th Amendment (long thread, 9/24/02)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/756324/posts
REVERSE THE 17th AMENDMENT NOW (vanity, 1999)
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b1d0a3f02e6.htm
Say goodbye to the 17th Amendment?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/756596/posts
What would Happen in the Senate, if not for the 17th Amendment? (1/23/99 vanity )
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a36aa1bd125c6.htm
What can he possibly talk about next OTHER than the issues that good people of Illinois might care about.
"Our State Senate here in OK has been RAT since OK became a state -- no way do we want a legislature like ours picking our Senator. The party of the ethically challenged Carroll Fisher picking our Senators? I don't think so -- dumb idea especially when you have legislatures that gerrymand to stay in office."
I agree completely!
Arguments like yours are the very reason Keyes' goofy idea will never even be considered.
Good Lord.
Is this what his opponent is running on?
Why not promote issuing letters of marque and reprisal against terrorists instead of using the U.S. military? Bounty hunters.
Yeah. That'll work.
What a maroon. If he's dumb enough to try to use this as a "gotcha" in the debates, Keyes will embarrass him.
_______________________________________________
FYI, Keyes didn't raise this issue. Some reporter "found" (more likely provided by DNC opposition research) Keyes' quotes from 1995 and 1999 regarding the issue, and then asked Keyes' spokesman about them, in an effort to embarass Keyes. The media certainly isn't going to present the issue fairly.
Single women with beebers, you mean. A really nice set of beebers.
Everything is going great for Keyes, so of course he has to get wacky...here's a softball for Osama to attack. Disappointing,
Actually, Keyes answered the question, not a spokesman. And, he didn't seem to be embarrassed by the question, at all.
This is not a smart thing to be talking about.
"Better idea, we should go back to the days when you had to be a landowner "
Why? I'm genuinely curious
I think the man's a brilliant orator, and perhaps even a very capable administrator, but I don't see him ever being elected to higher office during his lifetime.
If he were actually intent on playing a serious role in policymaking decisions, he would wait for Roscoe Bartlett to retire and then run for his open seat.
Finally we are to the point where you do not value a system of government you do not understand. This was what the "War Between the States" was fought over. No longer will the central government be subservient to individual states. No matter how much we protest we are all destined to remain Federal citizens rather than citizens of free and independant states.
It appears that y'all yankee socialist republicans just can't see why, when someone with honor, integrity and courage wants to bring this country back out of the socialist tarpits it has been in for the past 40+ years.
You've been lining in this socialist regime for so long you have either forgotten what it is to be free, or you're too young to have ever lived in freedom.
But then - I bet most of you naysayers live in city socialist hives where true freedom causes panic!
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."
--- Ronald Reagan
This first appeared in the Daily Herald. I posted the article here earlier today. Do a search on "Keyes" and you'll find it.
The writer mentions halfway through the article that he gathered Keyes' support for the repeal of the 17th amendment from a 1995 radio program and a 1999 campaign appearance.
Now do you politically astute folks believe that this reporter dug this material up on his own?
Or do you suppose that it was provided by DNC opposition research in an effort to embarrass Keyes?
You make the call.
Keyes doesn't want to make this the centerpiece of his campaign. Keyes' opponents do.
"No longer will the central government be subservient to individual states."
We would have never survived if the states essentially had sovereignity... the Articles of Confederation government was an experiment in this and it didn't work out.
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.