Free Republic

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.� -Thomas Jefferson The Founding Fathers put Congress in control of the the U.S. monetary system. In 1913 Congress relinquished this awesome power and gave it to a private cartel with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. For almost 100 years, Federal Reserve policy has swindled Americans...

In last week's column I highlighted comments made to the Financial Times of London by U.S. Comptroller General David Walker in which he compared the current political, social, and economic situation in the United States to that of the Roman Empire shortly before its collapse. I heard from a number of readers in response to the column… Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians. While a couple of folks used the opportunity to plug a particular presidential candidate or legislative issue, almost all were in agreement that things in our nation must change drastically and quickly. Despite a booming economy, low unemployment, and...

There are very, very few things about the Constitution that I would just outright change. There are lots of very important areas where reasonable people can differ, with enormous consequence, and I would certainly like to see those clarified, but that's not what I mean here. Here I'm talking about things in the current Constitution, as amended, that are just plain wrong. The first and foremost among these is the 17th Amendment. If I could change one thing about the Constitution, it would be to clarify the meaning of "general welfare". If I could change two, though, the second would...

Napoleon resident John F. “Jack” Green is 78 years old and runs about three miles every morning. He also is running for Congress in the 5th District special election as a write-in candidate. “I’m running because I can’t lose. I can only win,” Green said. “How can you lose something you never had?” While Green’s name will not be on the ballot, the names of State Rep. Bob Latta, R-Bowling Green, and Democrat Robin Weirauch of Napoleon will be. Green said he ran for the same congressional seat six or eight years ago, when no Democrat candidate was running. Green,...

In an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times on October 10, 2007, University of Virginia Professor Larry Sabato argues for scrapping our Constitution and replacing it with a new one. He couldn’t be more wrong. In support of his call to redo the Constitution, Sabato trots out a quote from Thomas Jefferson positing that a constitution is only good for nineteen years. The quote comes from a letter Jefferson sent to James Madison on September 6, 1789. In his response, Madison raised several fundamental flaws to Jefferson’s (and Sabato’s) reasoning. The one most applicable to our times is this...

Many people with whom I talk about politics with are stunned by my constant assertions that America is not supposed to be a democracy. I credit public education for this. The fact is that most people are almost totally ignorant of history and completely brain-dead about the Constitution. Our Founding Fathers did not give us a democracy, nor did they intend to. They were very well-educated men (especially by today's standards), and they knew, historically, democracies had never worked, even on the small scales when they had been attempted. They knew if democracy wouldn't work on the small scale of...

It's a hardy perennial in the more philosophically-oriented conservative circles, despite its manifest political infeasibility: the argument that the Seventeenth Amendment should be repealed or should never have been passed. While this argument does have its virtues, I disagree. Regardless of whether it was a good idea at the time, repealing the 17th Amendment today would only weaken the mechanisms that are essential to conservative policies and conservative philosophy. Specifically, restoring to state legislatures the power over the election of Senators would make the Senate less directly accountable to the people and insulate the federal courts even further from public...

In the heat of the electoral controversy — the worst possible time to make constitutional decisions — many people, such as Senator-elect Hillary Rodham Clinton, are calling for an end to the Electoral College. Big mistake. Someone once said, Don’t knock down a wall merely because you cannot immediately see what it’s good for. The same can be said for the Electoral College. We should keep in mind that the Founding Fathers were of somewhat better caliber than the politician you are likely to see on television, including those with presidential ambitions. The Electoral College was not an idea floating...

The Tip Of The Iceberg By Sterling H. Saunders A week ago Jim posted information from our web page pertinent to our plan to Repeal the 17th Amendment. In it we had stated our reasons to be centered on a government run amuck. The following examples are just the tip of the iceberg. For every one you see here there are hundreds more in the same category. In some instances, thousands. Therefore, we believe we have a sound basis for doing what we're doing. Some of the examples are simply stupid or ridiculous. At the other end of the spectrum...

This weblog calls for the repeal of the 17th Amendment and addresses the abusive hegemony committed by the U. S. Senate. If Americans want to remove some corruption from government, the first significant step is to repeal the 17th Amendment. Americans should fear the steady growth by the oligarchy in the Senate. We should fear the oligarchs more because our Constitution cannot be spoiled by bombs, the courts, or the President; only through legislation.

Abstract: "The Irony of Populism: The Republican Shift and the Inevitability of American Aristocracy" analyzes the shift in the role of the Supreme Court following the movement towards a democratic Senate which culminated in the Seventeenth Amendment. The Supreme Court's shift is presented as the inevitable result of the system of mixed government that underlies the constitutional order, which orders American Government into democratic, aristocratic, and monarchical parts. While in the original conception of the constitution the Senate was the aristocratic part, the Senate would become part of the democratic part with the Seventeenth Amendment and prior procedural changes. Into...

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment by Thomas J. DiLorenzo May 17, 2005 Every once in a blue moon someone in Congress (usually Congressman Ron Paul of Texas) proposes a law or resolution that would actually improve the prospects for human liberty and prosperity. It’s rare, but not nonexistent. One such case is Senate Joint Resolution 35, introduced into the U.S. Senate on April 28, 2004, which was recently brought to my attention by Laurence Vance. S.J. Res. 35 reads: "Resolved . . . . The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed." That’s Section...

If you really want to use Enron and Global Crossing to shape the political environment forever, then push the following elegant campaign finance reform solution: Repeal the 17th amendment to the Constitution. Passed in 1913, the 17th Amendment made the Senate directly electable by the people. Prior to this, the Senate was appointed by each State Legislature. The Founding Fathers wanted the Senate to be the States' representation in Congress -- the House was the people's representation. The Founding Fathers made the Congress a two-chamber house for a reason. They wanted new legislatation to be passed by both a majority ...

With respect to states' rights, it should be readily apparent to all that state governments cannot exert any meaningful influence or control over the federal government, judiciary, or any other federal institution. Let us state the problem precisely. At the present time, there are no checks and balances available to the states over federal power or over Congress itself in any area. However, in the history of our country, it was not always this way. In the original design by the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, there was an effective check on Congress through the state legislatures' power to appoint...

From The Center for Constitutional Studies Democratizing the Constitution: The Failure of the Seventeenth AmendmentC. H. Hoebeke*[From HUMANITAS, Volume IX, No. 2, 1996 © National Humanities Institute, Washington, DC USA] It was with no small sense of vindication that Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan signed the proclamation of 31 May 1913, declaring the Seventeenth Amendment duly ratified and incorporated into the fundamental laws of the United States. More than twenty years earlier as a Nebraska congressman, "The Great Commoner" had joined the struggle to free the Senate from the control of corrupt state legislatures, and despite three failed campaigns for...

Title: The Road to Mass Democracy: Original Intent and the Seventeenth Amendment Author: C. H. Hoebeke Published: New Brunswick, N. J.: Transaction Publishers, 1995. Price: $39.95 (hardcover) Pages: 211 Reviewer: Todd J. Zywicki Affiliation: Mississippi College School of Law The Constitution of 1787 provided for the appointment of United States senators by state legislatures. In 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment was ratified, installing the current regime of direct election of U.S. senators. The bloated and special-interest-driven nature of the federal government during this century has led scholars in recent years to reexamine the original framework of the Senate and to...

"An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense - perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire - that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other. In order to understand the source of their antagonism, it is necessary first to understand the specific role of gold in a free society. Money is the common denominator of all economic transactions. It is that commodity which serves as a medium...

"An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense - perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire - that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other. In order to understand the source of their antagonism, it is necessary first to understand the specific role of gold in a free society. Money is the common denominator of all economic transactions. It is that commodity which serves as a medium...