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!!
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.
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).
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 !
My husband and I are definitely for the repeal of the 17th amendment. Hubby is definitely FOR the flat tax.
The only thing that I can hope for is a conversion of heart in those that serve. I don't see that happening any time soon.
Folks, the 17th Ammendment is not going to be repealed an you are wasting your time trying to do so. One of the beauties of the COTUS was that it could be amended as times and changes dictated. The COTUS was properly amended when it was realized that the original idea of Senators being picked by legislatures was no longer working as intended.
My home state of Oklahoma now has a Republican controled legislature. However, for most of its history it was strongly democrat. However, even with the people voting for Democrats for state offices, they sent Republican senators to Congress. If the 17th had not have been in effect, then Oklahoma would have been sending ONLY democrats to the Senate.....a bad thing.
The people directly electing Senators is the better idea for the conditions as they are today. IF the day of “Statesmen” ever returns, then repeal of the 17th would be OK. I don’t see a day of “Statesmen” in our future.
Actually, IF you really want to push for something that would improve things, then push for an amendment that will institute term limits on the House and Senate. We need more citizen legislators. There are folks still in the House and Senate that should be gone...if there were term limits they would be.
How about reversing the court decision which illegitimately requires state legislative seats to be allocated by population, rather than e.g. by county? I’m sure the Founding Fathers would be totally aghast at the idea that one house of a state legislature (perhaps called a “state Senate” might allocate the same number of seats to a county with 10,000 people as one with 1,000,000. Just as aghast as they would be with the idea of states having Senators allocated like that.