Vox Writer: Ditch U.S. Constitution, Replace With Parliamentary System

NewsBusters ^ | March 3, 2015 | P.J. Gladnick

[PJ-Comix]

Intrepid boy reporter Dylan Matthews at General Electric (also Comcast) Vox got hilariously spanked in public recently when he proposed that the U.S. Senate be abolished because it was "anti-democratic." Matthews somehow forgot (or never learned) that we have a federal system so such an abolition would be impossible under our system of government. Therefore, young Dylan found another outlet for his pubescent enthusiasms. Why, if we can't abolish the Senate under the current system then BINGO! Ditch the despised constitution and replace it with a parliamentary system.

To get a proper fix on Dylan's latest crusade, let us take a trip down memory lane to early January when young Dylan had the U.S. Senate in his sights:

[youngphys01]

Well as it is we seem to think the entire US Constitution is just a series of polite suggestions for our leaders. Maybe other Americans will learn the need to fight for it when they remember how nice it is to actually take this document even semi seriously.

[SevenofNine]

They were thinking about bring it back remaking it I think they couldn’t get off the ground seriously they were plan remake Yes Prime Minister for 21th century audience

BBC said I don’t think so LOL!

Yeah I remember that show periodically they show YEs PM on my local PBS station

[hanamizu]

The Founding States made the Constitution amendable, so it’s a matter of amending the Constitution to “repeal” the Senate.

---

That’s the one part of the Constitution that cannot changed through the amendment process. See Article V.

[tophat9000]

Yea but if we had a Parliament.. Obama would be gone.. the Dem are the minority party..

Bet the lib idiot did not think of that..

Really he does not want a Parliament

He wants a leftest Dictator with a rubber stamp house that tows the Dictators line

[Amendment10]

"That’s the one part of the Constitution that cannot changed through the amendment process."

Noting that the Senate is probably not going to be “repealed” in the foreseeable future, please consider the following. Even if the Senate didn’t support such an amendment, I don’t see anything stopping the states from proposing an amendment to “repeal” the Senate to themselves via a constitutional convention.

In fact, if it wasn’t for the ill-conceived 17th Amendment (17A), the states could refuse to elect federal senators. I understand that some states had failed to provide federal senators before 17A was ratified.

[hanamizu]

I’m doing this from memory here, but Article V which discusses the procedure for amendments says that states cannot be deprived of their equal representation in the Senate. If someone wants to scrap the Senate, they have to scrap the entire Constitution. (Although nowadays, it seems like a lot of the Constitution has been scrapped).

[Durus]

Article 5, and the concept of the senate representing the states, was destroyed by the 17th amendment.

[hanamizu]

Article V wasn’t destroyed or even touched by the 17th amendment. The idea that Senators represented their state governments was. The whole point of having the Senate ratify treaties, judges and justices etc. was to guarantee that the state governments were represented in the federal government and its important actions. That was swept away in 1913. Another gift from the progressives.

[Repeal The 17th]

Here, 100 years after the passage of the 17 amendment,
I sometimes wonder to myself “why” we even have a senate.
What purpose does it serve any more?

Playing off of one of your earlier comments...
“...no state, without its consent,
shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate...”

Would “zero suffrage” be equal “suffrage”?

[Durus]

I’m not sure I agree with you concerning article V but I certainly agree with you concerning the rest.

[Impy]

You need to be reconstructed if you’re comparing Lincoln to Obama.

Lincoln would kick Obama in the balls.

[Impy]

if political parties were allowed to come into existence,

Lol, what do you mean "allowed"? People disagree so they are a natural development. Most of those same founders became members of the first 2 parties.

[central_va]

Lincoln and Obama; both tyrants with no respect for the Constitution.

[Impy]

I don’t get you people who are fixated on the damn Confederacy (those great lovers of liberty and the constitution, lol). They lost, get over it.

Your long dead great great great grandpappy doesn’t need you to defend his his honor.

[central_va]

Our current situation can be traced back to the Federal giant created during the CW. States rights died and we are now at a crossroads, DO YOU GET THAT?

[BookmanTheJanitor]

I don’t know whether to laugh at the guy ...or just feel so sad for him.

[Impy]

Our current situation can be traced back to Andrew Jackson and his populist bullshite, it’s his ideology that evolved into modern socialism, not Lincoln’s.

And the problem isn’t the federal government, it’s all levels of government, it’s no different when a state oppresses you, or a locality.

“States rights died”

States rights died when Slave owners used the Federal Government to force Northern States to help catch and return escaped slaves. GD hypocrites.

[BillyBoy]

>> States rights died when Slave owners used the Federal Government to force Northern States to help catch and return escaped slaves. GD hypocrites. <<

Yep, Plus, the confederates were such good proponents of "States rights" that they unlawfully removed the duly-elected Governor of Texas when he pointed out Texas had become the Republic of Texas again after seceding, and therefore refused to be subservient to the Confederacy or take an oath to support their pro-slavery "cause". Obviously the needs of the C.S.A. trumped the sovereignty of Texas. I guess "states rights" was only OK when it helped spread slavery.

[fr_freak]

Lol buy a dictionary

[RedStateRocker]

The Roman Senate ‘served a purpose’ after Augustus, too. Just a very different one. (yes, I know it was a long and bloody fall of the Republic, but really the Empire begins with Augustus.