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

To: rabscuttle385

I don’t understand what all the commotion is about since the text in the constitution is pretty clear about how the vacancies are supposed to be filled.

“and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies”

The Senate was intended to be “the states’ house” in order to balance competing interests between the people at large and those of the states. I agree that the 17th amendment should be repealed in order to restore the balance and give states the voice in the government that they were intended to have. By taking that away and making the Senate a people’s house on steriods, we don’t really have that built in check between the will of the majority and rights of the minority and are wide open to legislative arbitrage and tyranny.


4 posted on 10/07/2009 2:03:49 AM PDT by dajeeps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dajeeps
We will never repeal the 17th. The people will not give up the right to vote on Senators.

If we did repeal it, we would immediately have the 17th x 50. Prior to 1913 many states (perhaps as many as half) had curtailed the state legislature's power in this area. Senate candidates were chosen by some type of referendum among the people. The legislature then appointed the winner. The legislatures were simply brokers or a de facto electoral college.

5 posted on 10/07/2009 2:27:52 AM PDT by MARTIAL MONK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | 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