Skip to comments.Senate president wants 17th Amendment repealed
Posted on 11/12/2010 8:31:29 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
CORBIN LEXINGTON (AP) Kentucky Senate President David Williams told a group of law students that state legislators, not voters, should choose members of the U.S. Senate comments that drew a negative reaction from Kentuckys two senators.
Declaring himself a tea partier, Williams on Wednesday called for repeal of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides for popular election of U.S. senators, the Lexington-Herald Leader reported.
Williams is seeking the Republican nomination for governor next year.
(Excerpt) Read more at thetimestribune.com ...
I back the Tea Party. I don’t back this man.
Repeal the 17th? Great idea, restore the republic.
Our new Representative in Florida 2 is also in favor of repealing the 17th amendment and returning the Constitution to it’s original way of selecting Senators.
I don’t much care one way or the other but probably would vote to repeal the 17th just because I think it would give states more power.
Apparently Williams can’t add. If KY’s legislature elected Senators, both would be Democrats.
You should. This is exactly what should happen across the nation. You have no idea how much harm the seventeenth Amendment has caused this nation and the ideals of it’s founders. Repealing it is one of the first steps to reclaiming our lost liberties. We must strengthen the states back to their original power. This is the primary weapon Progressives used to take ownership of this nation.
I don’t trust my legislators as far as I could throw them.
The purpose of the US Senate was supposed to be a body that deliberated outside the whim of popular politics. That’s why the US Senate was granted to approve treaties and judges. The US Senate has essentially been turned into an At-large congressional district.
“I dont back this man.”
Why? He wants to strengthen the republic and restore the balance of power built into in the Constitution.
Is it that, or some other reason?
Not necessarily. You see how many states have passed legislation to appeal 0bamacare. The entire Senate of delegation of the Commonwealth of VA would be GOPers.
While I would prefer the repeal of the 17th Amendment, I must agree that the chances of a repeal are unlikely. But there is an alternative that might prove to be even better than a repeal, solving this problem and many others.
An amendment to create a Second Court of the United States. It would rank in between the Supreme Court and the federal District Courts, but it would *not* itself be a federal court. Instead it would be composed of 100 judges appointed by the State legislatures.
Every year, some 8,000 cases are appealed from the federal District Courts to the Supreme Court, that can only hear a couple of dozen of them. The rest, no matter how important, are stuck with the decision made by the federal District Courts.
The Second Court of the United States would get first crack at these cases, *not* to determine if they were constitutional or not; but a step further, to determine if they should be handled by the federal courts *at all*, or should be returned to the State courts in which most of them began.
Additionally, the Second Court of the United States would act as a “nullification court”, giving the States a means to possibly reject new federal laws and mandates, bureaucratic regulations, executive orders, etc., that the States felt exceeded federal authority.
The Second Court of the United States would have original jurisdiction in all cases involving lawsuits between the States and the federal government, such as the effort of the Justice Department to sue Arizona over its anti-illegal alien bill. If enough States supported Arizona’s stand, they could decide to slap the Department with an injunction to stop the suit.
I’ve been over this with the anti-17ers and it just doesn’t benefit us on the whole (in fact, we would’ve gained fewer seats in the election than we ended up with now). Too many states would be completely closed off to us (MA, for example, we’d never elect another Republican Senator again for perpetuity - not with a 90% Dem legislature).
What would their term be? Could they be recalled at any time?
I would love to have JimRob jump in on this.
I like the idea.
The benefit would come years down the road. Much of the money pressure, need to campaign, and the like would be gone or minimized, and after a while the makeup of the senate would be quite different.
And I think it would be easier to change out a senator, if a small number of state politicians were in charge of his job.
It took a few years for the senate to become what it is, I think it would take longer to get it back.
It would be 6 years just like the Founders had it.
Through the courts, the majority of the people in the USA have been forced to live more and more according to the desires of 20% of the electorate. Anything they can't get through Congress, is achieved through the courts.
Most recent example: Alaska write in votes. State law clearly states the name must be spelled correctly. Judge says not really, the intent of the voter rules. Judge should have said I think the state law needs to be revisited, but at the present time, the law must be followed. JMHO..
I agree that the amendment needs repealing and is totally unlikely, but what if states set up a system to allow voters to recall their senators with 60% of the vote required to pass the recall petition?
I’ve reviewed it from every which way (indeed, I’ve researched every person to have ever held a seat in Congress), and what you think will happen (in a positive way with a better class of Senators and perhaps state legislators) simply won’t. I suggest taking a look what happened during the last decades from the 19th century through to the ratification of the 17th. There’s a reason why it was passed. Big money, special interests, personal fiefdoms, hackery and the like... it was all there, and many of them were not “high minded” of the Constitution and states rights. With the people having a direct say, it levelled the playing field a bit. It’s better how it is now.