Repeal the 17th Amendment to stop secession

Repeal the 17th Amendment Yahoogroups | November 15 | Brian Duffy

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

All:

Thanks for responding.

Paul, I agree with you, but there is a part of me that believes there might be something we can do.

Dan, I agree with some of you your points, mainly the first, which is where I see my effort moving toward. Though, I am not sure how you measure the “corruptness” of the states verses the federal government. I consider the states nothing more than vassals of the federal government, some more than others.

Lee, I am serious only to a point. In that I agree with Dan and I see this as first an information effort straight up. Get the word out, troll, blog, podcast, etc. but start transmitting. I understand your position but I can only allocate a limited amount of time, and no money. I left the “war for profit business” to sheep herding and while my food stores are abundant my pocket book is not.

For the last year or so I have been following two groups in the US, which are made up of millennials, the alt-left, being the Bernie Sanders followers or Occupy, and the alt-right, leaderless yet anti-establishment to the core and much more so than the alt-left, but focused on nationalism and extreme white nationalism. In these two groups I see some sort of major change being advanced, one of which I believe is a serious push toward secession. I see the Cascadia Movement and Texas Secession Movement as potential indicators. This is what prompted me to want to resurrect a discussion about the 17th.

While I am not completely opposed to secession I believe that our future can be tempered and protected only by and with our current US collective strength. The problem I see is that unless we take back the abusive elements, i.e. the military defense industry, regulatory abuse, election process, Fed Reserve, and loss of sovereignty, meaning foreign treaties, we will eventually move toward secession because these external forces will eventually rip us apart, and then we will be completely vulnerable to regional or international governance imposed by the dominate elite, which I think we can all agree is actually out there and very real.

The millennials do not hold to the same norms and ideals we do, due in large part to the US education system and break down of the family unit over three generations. Yet in their kind of self-absorbed outlook they have, I believe rolling back the federal government by way of repeal of the 17th may be a means of preventing secession and be extremely agreeable to this demographic.

Repealing the 17th would begin the process of rolling back the federal domination and restore the balance between the states and national government, in that state could evolve to become unique entities rather than this homogenized iApple/Google/Gap behaving people we have become. (Maybe this too Ron Paul?)

These are just some random thoughts, but I am interested in moving forward with a limited effort. I don’t want this to be a circle jerk, but alternatively I’m not going to sell the farm and go on the road to speak at Kiwanis club meetings throughout the country.

[capt. norm]

If you visit the Kiawnis here in Panama City, FL, You will be fed great buffet and meet a lot of nice people to lunch with.

[Amendment10]

"Repealing the 17th would begin the process of rolling back the federal domination and restore the balance between the states and national government, in that state could evolve to become unique entities rather than this homogenized iApple/Google/Gap behaving people we have become. (Maybe this too Ron Paul?)”

Good point !

But if the states repeal 17A, they also need to put a stop to unconstititional federal taxes, taxes that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.

“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

Once unconstitutional federal taxes are stopped, the states will probably find a tsunami of new revenues that they won’t know what to do with.

[amnestynone]

If California and New England want tol eave I amall for it.

[super7man]

You seem to have a timing issue with your space bar.

I suggest and oil change and tuneup. Cap, rotor, and condenser.

[Dalberg-Acton]

“Once unconstitutional federal taxes are stopped, the states will probably find a tsunami of new revenues that they won’t know what to do with.”

I promise you, it won’t take them long to find something to spend it on.

[Amendment10]

"I promise you, it won’t take them long to find something to spend it on."

Fortunately, unlike for federal lawmakers, it’s relatively easy for the states to make recall laws for state lawmakers, several states already having such laws.

[BDParrish]

This is a procedural change to a systemic philosophical problem. Our people do not believe in liberty!

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Repeal the 17th is a start, but we can go further - some states need to be broken down into smaller states.

Upstate NY, Southern IL, and CA should be broken down.

[bankwalker]

And the 19th ...

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

At least some of Mark Levin’s other Liberty Amendments is more what I had in mind.

[publius911]

But if the states repeal 17A, they also need to put a stop to unconstititional federal taxes, taxes that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.

That's such a great idea, but there is a less controversial path to the same results.

Reanimate and strengthen the 9th. Solidly part of the Bill of Rights, not subject to Amendment.

[thoughtomator]

if we’re fixing mistakes it’s long past time to revisit the 19th too

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The 17^th Amendment enables judicial activism, which is primarily directed against the authority of the states. E.g., Rove v. Wade - the overturning of which, as Republicans often note, would return the issue to the state governments. If the Senate were again beholden to the state legislatures, rulings which denigrate the rights of the states might get you convicted of impeachment.

Unfortunately, repeal of 17A is a heavy lift. I have wondered if a new amendment changing the senator’s terms to four years, and making senators running mates of the governors might work. The idea would be to make the senators dependent on the state government in some way, at least. One thought would be to make the governor able to take office as senator four years after election as governor. Thus, if the governor doesn’t win reelection, the senator who ran with him(or her) would tend to lose his job. Every governor would be, potentially, a senator - thereby making governors larger VIPs in Washington.

[Jacquerie]

<>At least some of Mark Levin’s other Liberty Amendments is more what I had in mind.<>

I thoroughly agree. They would super-federalize our increasingly consolidated system. At a minimum, the 17A was a mistake and must go.