[Perdogg]

Wasn't Jar Jar Binks appointed to the Senate??? ;)

[twigs]

But then Harris Wofford was defeated at the next regularly scheduled election by Rick Santorum. Sigh.

[ccc_jr]

Worst amendment ever. Totally destroyed the balance of power between the states and the federal government & turned our constitutional republic into a democracy. The mess of federal spending and abuse of power can be traced back to this horrible amendment.

[steve8714]

Hopefully Senator Johnson will recover, but he may have a long period of recuperation and be unable to perform his duties. He probably will not resign, so his party can keep control of the Senate.

[LdSentinal]

Thanks!

[Irontank]

The 17th Amendment (along with the ratification of the 16th Amendment and the creation of the Federal Reserve...all done in 1913) were three significant advances of the all-powerful centralized government in Washington DC...all enacted in the same fateful year

1913 was a very bad year as it signaled the end of the decentralized constitutional American Republic that had existed until that time

The direct election of Senators, the federal income tax and the Fed all laid the groundwork for the steady advances of socialism in America we have seen since the 1930's

[lonerepubinma]

Benjamin Smith (D-MA) Date Appointed: December 27, 1960 Elected: Did not seek election

This is the load that "old man Joe Kennedy" installed to fill JFK's seat until the "fat One" could run for office.

[MadHatChemist]

If the 17th amendment explicitly give the governor of each state the power to appoint a senator until an election occurs, then how can the states deny that right of the governors without violating the Constitution?

[Rurudyne]

Let me briefly say that the 17th Amendment was a huge mistake.

Justified as an enhancement of democracy it actually had the opposite effect.

Before the 17th it was the case that there were numerous independent and regional parties that prospered at the state and local level. One of the factors that influenced this was the fact that, because of the universal appointment of Senators, a political organization could hope to be nationally significant simply because they could be locally significant.

Thus one could support a regional party––say the Grange––and by means of local success hope to influence the direction of the nation. There was no argument that these votes were wasted.

Also, the same could be said of the major State political machines. Before the 17th these were the principal political influences on US Senators. For example: it was the State parties––by proxy of the State legislatures––that had the significant advisory role in any matters that might pass through the Senate ... especially the approval of Justices, judges, Ambassadors or foreign policy.

But the 17th reversed all of that.

Under the 17th the ability to elect a Senator fell under the auspices of the national parties rather than the state. It was no longer the case that an independent movement could hope to nominate––or influence the choice of candidate––simply because they were locally successful. The same was also true of the formerly powerful State parties as the adoption of this article began the process of converting them from the powerhouses they were to wholly owned––or pwned––franchises of the big National parties.

Likewise, the influence that was previously enjoyed by State legislatures now became the domain of the national parties. This meant that all of the special functions which the Senate enjoyed were no longer influenced by the fact that it is a lot easier to piss off a small number of elected officials to whom you are beholden for your job than to irk the electorate––who often vote on spurious, misinformed or even uninformed basis. The result is not only that the unelected National parties have the essential final say in matters like who gets to serve on the bench, but that the Senators are now quite secure in their jobs so long as nothing goes especially wrong.

So the net result of the 17th has been to transfer influence from elected and accountable State officials to unelected partisans. Further, it undermined the rich diversity of political choice present prior to its adoption and helped to whittle it down to just the two.

I could go on, but you get the drift.

It is no small coincidence that the 17th became law at the same time that the Income Tax was enabled. Both represent a massive power grab for the Federal Government and the major parties at the expense of the several States, the People and all independent political movements.

[paudio]

Thank you for the posting. Any data about the party of the senator who was replaced and his/her replacement? Is it a common practice to replace a senator of different party? I'm aware it depends on the state, as each state may have different rule for it. I think the I-MN senator was a replacement for a Democrat...

[screaming eagle2]

I always thought that the replacement process for senators was a bit cloudy. And if you have an ill legislator that refuses to step down,nothing can be done

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

11 of the 96 from 1917-1919? Wow! I wonder if it was WWI, the flu or something else?

[Borges]

Jocelyn Burdick turns 95 today.