California and New York may even fall into despotism, but many of us will be so While I am not sure if McLaughlin is completely oblivious as to history, or being intentionally deceitful, I’m not going to speculate. Not the last time McLaughlin undermines his own argument in the article. When the mob votes, you get candidates that are just like them. From 1789 until 1913, U.S. The presidential election outcome is totally irrelevant to whether senators are directly elected. Never mind that the Founding Fathers foresaw that was a bad idea - onward in our rush toward democracy! Why?
In their mind, money is the federal government’s. The framers intended this for two reasons. The Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution established the popular election of United States senators by the people of the states.
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works. The 17th Amendment, for those who don’t know (and because I want to keep you on my article instead of looking up other things, of course) was ratified in 1913 and established the direct election of Senators by popular vote, doing away with about 120 years of … All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the History shows us that nationalism is
I completely reject the author’s notion that South Carolina has serious problems. The fact Mike Huckabee called for the repeal of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, which created popular elections for senators. Would liberal state legislatures that have adopted same-sex marriage or medical marijuana send to Washington senators who are bolder than current ones about espousing such causes? Instead, senators are now elected directly by the people. At the same time, Sen. Byrd and the the Dodd family remain firmly entrenched despite popular voting laws through the 17th Amendment. The famous Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 were a symbol of this shift because they took place before the public, even though the winner of the race was picked by state legislators. Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
“Yet he was getting tons of cash nationally. It's clear that the state is doing a lousy job of turning out responsible citizens. Glenn Beck, in a critique of the amendment, pointed to candidates such as departing Connecticut Democrat Christopher Dodd.
Here in the United States we have a democratic representative Republic where the ultimate authority is we the PEOPLE, whether direct or indirect.
Add to that the Nov. 2 victory of Mike Lee, a former Supreme Court clerk elected as the next senator from Utah, who also urges repeal of the 17th Amend¬ment. “The question is whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing.
being itself, a laughable notion. Responding to a question about changes he would like to see in the Constitution, Scalia was quoted as saying, “There’s very little that I would change….I would change it back to what they wrote, in some respects. If voters are making choices down-ballot as a reflection of their presidential pick, wouldn’t an independent legislature acting on its own interests be the best way to combat this?
Power doesn't derive from the just consent of the governed, it derives from Fidel Castro and the Communist Party. Illinois’s state legislative elections that year were basically a proxy war between the two Senate candidates. Judge Andrew J. Napolitano said, “Is any part of the Constitution unconstitutional? A response to the National Review article, “Ben Sasse is Wrong: Keep the 17th Amendment” Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal some time ago calling for several reforms, the largest being repeal of the 17th Amendment. The 17th Amendment was one of several innovations during the so-called Progressive Era meant to promote direct democracy, such as ballot initiatives, recall elections and party primaries.
An Electoral College would choose presidents; it still does, but usually reflects the popular vote. Federalism isn’t perfect, states like
newsletter.
On the flip side there was so much corruption in State Legislator’s that the the integrity of the Senate was compromised. Among the changes Sasse proposed was the repeal of the 17th Amendment. If we rewind far enough, JFK never would have made it into the senate in the first place. “There has been more federal activity of all kinds,” since the 17th Amendment came into being, Zywicki said. The 17th Amendment,” referring to the fact that direct election of senators is contrary to the guarantee at Philadelphia that the states would be a check on federal government power.
The 17th Amendment was embraced by legislators and the public as a way to both reduce corruption and take a divisive issue off legislators’ agendas. What’s not to like?
A party boss or wealthy conglomerate might be able to buy off a few dozen state legislators to pick a favorite senator, but they couldn’t buy off thousands or millions of voters.
Please also read our Privacy Notice and Terms of Use, which became effective December 20, 2019. Indirect elections. All this attention to the 17th Amend¬ment is amusing and bewildering to George Mason University School of Law professor Todd Zywicki, who has been writing about the 17th Amendment and urging its repeal for upwards of 20 years.
Gans also said it is “not surprising” that, seven years after the 17th Amendment’s passage, a constitutional amendment giving the right to vote to women was approved by a Senate elected the new way — and pressured by women in their states.
If you get your news from the political press and television ads, you might think... © 2020 Constitutional Accountability Center. This post is part of Mischiefs of Faction, an independent political science blog featuring reflections on the party system. Not only does direct election of senators lead those senators to compete in confiscating and redistributing wealth in order to buy votes, but there's also the distinct possibility that, (Hm, how can I put this delicately?) The past 100 years provide ample evidence of that,
Get our newsletter in your inbox twice a week. Four amendments (income tax, direct election of senators, Prohibition, and women’s suffrage) were ratified between 1913 and 1920, making it the most amendment-friendly seven-year stretch since the 1790s.
He is critical of pork-barrel spending, entitlements, and block grants. States and People were supposed to make up the Congress. The 17th kicked one leg out. The point about local and state elections just bolsters the argument for indirect election of senators. Posted on 06/14/2010 5:11:50 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks, The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution allowed for direct election by the voters of their senators.
McLaughlin’s argument – if you want to call it that, sometimes he fails to support his own premise at all – is either completely ignorant of history, or willfully misleading. McLaughlin goes on to use three points to make the case that restoring indirect election of senators is bad for conservatism. In 1914, the first year of Senate elections, every Senate incumbent who sought reelection (each of whom had been appointed by a state legislature) retained his seat.
To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy. The direct election of senators (like the direct primary, which was also becoming popular at this time) was seen as a possible remedy. Sorry, but the page you are looking for doesn't exist. But whatever the reason for the amendment, Zwicki and kindred conservatives think the previous system worked far better. Makes perfect sense to me.
Except aside from clearly demonstrating his sub-par intelligence, he's not transparent at all.
The Senate became more like the House, leaving the Supreme Court as the only nonelected branch (unless one counts the somewhat vestigial Electoral College selection of presidents.) Score an extra 20% off of these 30 already discounted items... How Big Tech became such a big target on Capitol Hill, Inside the federal government’s defense program for diplomats, Activists work to heal damaging effects of redlining on minority Americans. Through their influence over the appointment of senators, writes Charles Stewart, “The Gilded Age Senate became in part a college of state party bosses.”. <<, The same way an an unemployed, inarticulate, potential criminal who ran no campaign, displays no mental acuity, and must periocially be poked with a stick in order to ensure he's still alive Roland Burris got to become Senator when we left it up to crooked state officials instead of the voters to pick Illinois' current U.S.