Posted on 04/23/2010 11:02:09 PM PDT by neverdem
The 17th was the greatest damage to federalism between the Civil War and the New Deal and arguably more damaging than the New Deal.
fyi
True - good point.
Of possible interest to you all.
The 17th Amendment:
"The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution."
yeap it was a huge mistake.
Excellent post — thanks.
Cronyism might give us dull, compromising Senators from a pre-17th method. There might be more McCains, not less.
If I understand the writer correctly, he's charging the 17th Amendment with having enabled the New Deal and FDR's presidential imperialism.
New York's Sen. Roscoe Conkling is another.
Perhaps what we need is something like an electoral college for senators or some such device to compensate for weaknesses of direct election by state residents.
"Now that both Representatives and Senators have an identical interest (pandering to the citizenry) Congress is one herd of cattle in two pens."
Exactly.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Curmudgeon Emeritus of Eternity Road
I have thought about the repeal of the 17Th Amendment and I’m still not sure that would be a good move.
The roll of State and Federal government should be creating a Level Playing Field. What is good for one is good for all. Instead we have State and Federal government picking “Winners and Losers” with tax codes and regulations.(It reminds me of my childhood when I earned money and my parents would tell me how I could spend my earnings or else.)
What do Lobbyist do? Their job is to tilt the “Playing Field” in the favor of “One” at the expense of the “Rest” through tax laws and/or regulations. So now our taxes and regulations’ “Playing Field” looks like the Rocky Mountains with hundreds of thousands codes.
If we had a very simple tax code, either a “Fair” or “Flat” with no Exemptions, would not that eliminate 90% of the BS and corruption in Government?
Far more than merely repealing amendments we must irrevocably change minds not just opinions on certain issues. There is a disconnect when 80% claim to be conservatives when in the same breath on other polls almost 45% still support Obama. We need to learn that politics are emotions and most people vote with emotions, regardless of logic. Conservatives had better understand this or we will die. It’s fine to discuss ideas amongst ourselves. We need to go out there and proselytize. Temporary victories must be opportunities to turn the national ideology into a permanent majority. That has been the goal of the left since day one. We have not reciprocated.
Apparently, there are ten States that never even ratified the 17th Amendment: 1. Alabama 2. Kentucky 3. Mississippi 4. Virginia 5. South Carolina 6. Georgia 7. Maryland 8. Delaware 9. Rhode Island 10. Florida
And
25% of the Senators now in DC originally got there based on a Governor's appointment.
But there are moves afoot to remove that appointment option for Governors
In 2009, Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Representative David Dreier of California proposed an amendment to remove the power of governors to appoint Senators.[18][19][20] Senators John McCain and Dick Durbin became co-sponsors, as did Representative John Conyers.[13] On March 11, 2009, a joint hearing was held between the Senate and House subcommittees on the Constitution regarding S.J. Res. 7 and H.J. Res. 21.[21] On August 6, 2009, the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution held a separate hearing.[22]
I haven't seen, "80% claim to be conservatives." Do you have a link? That must be a sloppy mix of those who identify as social conservatives and those who identify as fiscal conservatives. Among those who claim to be both, the best number that I've seen that's reproducible is about 40%, and that's just recently. For years, the "moderates" have been polled between 40 - 50%.
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.