Skip to comments.A great New Year's resolution: Henry Lamb cheers on movement to repeal 17th Amendment
Posted on 01/01/2011 12:14:15 AM PST by JohnHuang2
In hopes of returning to a previous, "better" condition, millions of Americans will resolve to: quit smoking, lose weight, or engage in some other activity to make their life better in some way. Suppose there were an activity in which Americans could engage that would make the entire world better, especially that portion of the world we call the United States of America. There is!
We can resolve to restore the original, unique republic created by our founders.
George Washington, Ben Franklin, James Madison and the handful of other great Americans who assembled in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 used nearly half of the Convention time debating the single issue of representation in the new government. Shall the new government be a government of the states, or a government of the people?
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Happy New Year, y’all! Take care and God bless!
Yessssssssss!!! Damn the will of the people! Screw them! WE career politicians in state government know what's best for you. I want POWER! Give me my lifetime federal job NOW!!!! DIE 17TH AMENDMENT!!
Yeah, Alex’s brother-in-law. He’s at the end of the bat at Fraunces Tavern, nursing his ale. He’ll talk your ear off about politics.
End of the BAR. Gee, I shouldn’t be up at this time of night. Happy New Year.
Both approaches have difficulties. Sinecures obtained by favors to the voters will be replaced with other sinecures obtained by cronyism in state governments.
Ironically, having an appointed upper house is much more common in nations that are NOT Republics. Prime examples today are the United KINGDOM and the DOMINION of Canada, both of whom have appointed upper houses, with the Queen as head of state.
When we declared independence from England and decided to put an appointed upper house into effect, we were retaining one of the old features of the old King George pre-Republic era. Other nations that abolished their monarchy and established Republics, like France, did away with the old arisocratic ways much quicker. Even the UK itself almost immediately did away with an appointed upper house when they were briefly a Republic in the 1600s. In their case, they simply abolished the upper house and let the House of Commons have sole legislative authority as the "rump parliment". Appointed upper houses in free republics are an oddity.
And here I am trying to figure out what B A R stands for...
Happy New Year
ANY president elected for life is not a president, but a DICTATOR.
As a Canadian, I’ll proudly point out that the term “Dominion of Canada”, a reference to Psalm 72:8 “He shall have Dominon from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth” - which is echoed in Canada’s national motto “Ad Mare Usque Ad Mare” (from sea to sea) - is no longer current.
It hasn’t been used officially since the 50’s and was essentially legally abolished by the Canada Act of 1982. Canada signs all of it’s international documents “Canada” and not “The Dominion of Canada”.
Also, our Senate, while appointed, hasn’t opposed an Act passed by our directly elected lower-house in my memory. If they did it would almost certainly result in an immediate change in our Constitution.
My New Year’s resolution is work towards reducing the behemoth in Versailles on the Potomac to pre-1849 size. 1849 was when the Department of the Interior was formed; some say unconstitutionally. It most certainly is NOT an enumerated power.
An ambitious, probably improbable, goal; but as in all compromises, start high and back off somewhat. An acceptable compromise would be 1862-size government(s).
Same to you JohnHuang@,
And keep up your usual good work.
No way, no how, nuh uh. Forget it, kill it, bury it, make it go away. Say bye-bye, buh-bye, adios, hasta la vista, sayonara, auf wiedersehn, don’t come back now, y’hear ?
Keep your stinkin’ hands off my RIGHT to directly elect MY U.S. Senators, you damn dirty apes !
instead of a knee-jerk reaction you might consider the information at the link provided in the response just previous to yours.i believe we have been ill served by voting for our senators directly instead of allowing the state legislators choose.it was all part of the complex checks and balances system designed by some of the brightest pennies to have ever graced our planet.
My husband and I are definitely for the repeal of the 17th amendment. Hubby is definitely FOR the flat tax.
The original intent of the founders was to have a weak central government, with the states retaining most of the political power. That is why the senate was appointed by the states. The house was the peoples house, and the senate was the states house. Now, both houses are run by political parties and special interest groups. With elected senators came campaigns with donations from special interest groups and political parties. The senate is no longer the states house. I say the only way to put the republic back and end this run on socialism, is to repeal the 17th....
I’ve been through this crap repeatedly with you guys and your pie-in-the-sky fantasies of what the Senate will be with its repeal, and you will never convince me of its soundness. All you’re doing is removing my right to directly elect a Senator (and don’t lecture me on influencing my state legislators — I’m in a VRA State Senate district and a perpetually Democrat State House and U.S. House district, meaning the only race I’ll have a say in is the Governorship and nothing else), and I will oppose that with every fiber of my being. There’s a damn good reason why the 17th was passed, and a good deal of it had to do with just how out of touch the Senators were becoming from their constituents and how more and more they were representing their own narrow personal interests and less with the Founding Fathers’ ideal of jealously standing up for their states. You’d also have a good number of states would be perpetually out of reach for electing Republican members (and even those where you’d have Republicans, the likelihood that they’d be RINOs is considerable — meaning more Lindsey Graham, McCain, Bob Bennett and Maine Twin types rather than DeMints or Coburns).
I take it you’re in a non-Democrat legislative district in our state ? Because I will fight like hell to keep that repeal from becoming a reality. Unless you want the perpetual Senate elections of RINOs Lamar! and Corker.