Repeal the 17th Amendment

I think that any repeal of the 17th Amendment should be part of a broader restructuring of government at all levels. This includes increasing the size of the House of Representatives from its current 435 members to 5,000 or 6,000. One might ask how more politicians will get us smaller government. Keep in mind that if only one person is in charge that is a dictatorship, and that is the biggest government of all. More House members means smaller districts and fewer votes needed for election, and therefore fewer campaign funds needed. A candidate could win an election running a low budget, grassroots, retail campaign. And they would not meet in session in one place, but rather at several sites connected through videoconferencing.

Let's give ourselves back to England!

Idiot? Whose the idiot?
Read up on the Connecticut Compromise also known as the Great Compromise.
The States would not have ratified the constitution unless the STATES had equal representation in the Senate. Now they have no representation in the Senate.

The bucameral legislature was designed to place the House in the hands of the people and grant them the power of the purse strings. The Senate was to represent the several States. That's why the Senate is designated as the body to approve presidential appointments and conform court appointees and approve Treaties. The president is the foreign embassador of the several states in the eyes of the world.

Can't you understand? The states are being trampled becuse they have no representation. I for one am willing to give up my vote on Senate because I know for a fact I could have much greater impact on my senator if I can convince my state rep to pressure him.

Repealing the 17th Amendment is a win-win for the people and the states. It is also the right thing to do. How can we allow the states to continue to endure TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.

I fail to see how the 17th Amendment is responsible for an increase of Federal power overall.

I think repealing the 17th Amendment is like using an atom bomb to kill pests.

If you want to deregulate an industry, or kill spending programs, or eliminate a Federal agency, then just get a bill passed.

But repealing the 17th Amendment would take us back to the 19th Century, when the selection of senators was performed in smoky social clubs (or the 21 Clubs or country clubs of today).

I would think that taking votes out of the hands of the people and reducing transparency in Federal government would not be what a 'populist movement' wants. But it seems to be now that (1) the Tea Party is not a large movement, (2) nor is it populist, and (3) nor is it rational.

Supporters of the 17th Amendment repeal know that if state legislatures went back to choosing senators, the 'red' states would send the most corrupt, looney, uneducated white men to the US Senate to repeal abortion, mandate school prayer, and expand the Federal government's power to legislate morality.

It certainly seems to me that this movement believes the best way to fix the Senate is to blow it up. Repealing the 17th Amendment would pretty much do that.

This section in the article about deadlocked legislatures being the sole reason for passage of the 17th amendment is fundamentally mistaken. George Henry Haynes, a political scientist writing in 1906, lists popular sovereignty as the first argument for popular vote, and argues: "Since the time of Jackson, one might almost say since the election of Jefferson, the increasingly dominant note of American democracy has been that government must be not a government by some aristocracy of wealth or intelligence, but by the people. ... Squarely in the road of democracy's consistent advance, a barrier with all the tremendous power of resistance possessed by a clause of the Constitution, stands this eighteenth century device for electing senators." You can read it here, pages 154-55: http://books.google.com/books?id=kWOIAAAAMAAJ&...

A large part of the debate in newspapers leading up to the amendment consisted of whether or not Southern states, which obviously excluded Black voters, should be able to use legislatures to select senators if they did not have widespread access to voting. Though the Constitution allows the federal government to intervene in state election law anyway, Northern senators actually feared the South would modify this rule. (This was the thrust behind the Bristow amendment.) Federal elections to the Senate would necessarily involve the federal government--that's why almost all of the states that voted against the 17th amendment were Southern.

I also happen to disagree (strongly) with the argument that we should repeal the 17th amendment, but at least get the history right, people!

Repeal of the 17th is appropriate. Like prohibition it has unintended consequences. I believe state legislators will find a way to appoint senators if thy see other states with representation. As for the concern of state legislators not being not being up to the job lets remember that many of our federal legislators cam from the state legislative bodies. I think Madison had it right. We desperately need the balance of power returned to or government.

Repeal of the Seventeenth may be the proper direction. I cringe at the thought of state legislatures having the responsibility of selecting/electing our national representatives. Too much partisanship already influences the direction our laws take. What will be the result of the change? The issue of lack of representation will now reoccur as it did prior to 1913. Can a subsection be included to the new amendment that would force a popular election when the legislature is deadocked? If nothing else, it would keep our various state legislatures honest and on top of their game. (Say, they cannot chose in two months time, then it becomes open to popular election which must be held within thirty days of said deadlock.)

The Tea Party Movement might consider State Representatives who might support the repeal of the 17th Amendment & the support of the 10th Amendment

As of last night I am convinced more than ever that the 16th and 17th amendments MUST be repealed. Without these amendments the health care bill could never have passed. Medicare and medicaid would be a thing of the past,not to mention the I.R.S. These amendments have written a blank check to the "progressive" socialists. Congressman Ron Paul has sponsored repeal amendments in every Congress in which he has been a member. He has been a lone voice in Congress for too long. Let's vote in November for candidates who will support repeal!!

u r all idiots if u want the amendment repealed

Section One is all that is needed. Period.

The more you add, the more you take away. Note the brevity of the original section in Article I, and it "worked" for 130 years. No need to overdo it with specifics enumerated in a federal amendment that govern how a state manages its Senators. Especially since restoring power to the several States is the entire point of this exercise.

I do appreciate the contribution to the discussion made by the additional sections of your proposed Amendment. As it is, Section Five is the most valuable for its further restrictions on federal power.

Remember, the entire problem was procedural to begin with, as you explained. It was NOT structural, though the change rendered by the Seventeenth Amendment was very much so. The original solution to a deadlocked legislature is the same that would be necessary today: let them work out their own procedural problems. That's what they're elected and paid to do. (If they allow their state to be unrepresented, then the electors can throw them out.)

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS on Section Four: I also agree that allowing the recall of Senators with a simple majority defeats the purpose of a six-year term. That long term is an important aspect of the Senate, as it is supposed to be the most removed from direct democracy and resilient for a time to the fleeting whims of the hoi polloi. In addition--and another problem with the specificity of your proposal--certain states (Nebraska and, potentially, Maine) have unicameral legislatures, so the "each house" terminology is awkward, though technically still correct.

Thank you, though, for this well-presented article on a very important issue!

I think there are enough groups challenging the legality of the 16th amendment. How about a group instead to challenge the constitutionality of the tax code instead? It surely violates the principle of equal protection by setting tax rates. If the income tax is legal, the only legal rate is one rate for all, no deductions or exemptions, and no minimum income level that doesn’t pay. This would force congress to be responsive to all the people. Also, how about a challenge to any and all laws that congress exempts itself from?

I think there are enough groups challenging the legality of the 16th amendment. How about a group instead to challenge the constitutionality of the tax code instead? It surely violates the principle of equal protection by setting tax rates. If the income tax is legal, the only legal rate is one rate for all, no deductions or exemptions, and no minimum income level that doesn’t pay. This would force congress to be responsive to all the people. Also, how about a challenge to any and all laws that congress exempts itself from?

The 17th amendments clearly did not fix the deadlock problem as the election of al Franklin proves. The people are just as capable of being in indecisive as the State legislators, at least in the legislator there is a democratic reason due to inability to agree on who to elect, rather then inability to agree on an election outcome.

If you wanted to fix it say repeal the 17th and say senators shall be elected by the state legislator and hold office until replaced. But that would cause more problems with the incumbent advantage merely needing to prevent a vote, its better to have no government then bad government. So I'm content to live with the "dead lock" problem, as long as we establish a quorum consist of at least 1 senator from every state.

Notably of course that will make the “dead lock” problem much more severe (one state could shut down congress by denying senators) in difference cases then just repealing the 17th amendment but again I contend that no Federal government is better then bad Federal government.

If all else fails the States have at least the means to defend themselves if actually invaded or such eminent danger of invasion as not to permit delay. So really it’s just reducing us to our basic elements.

Then again just repealing the 17th amendment and having the old “deadlock” problem constitutes a loss to the State in deadlock not to the whole of the united States so maybe they deserve to be unrepresented for the time they cant decide on a senator due to internal political wrangling.

It is not justifiable to screw over everyone just because one person is doing harm to themselves.

So in conclusion the best answer is simply repealing the 17th amendment, if New York wants to harm itself with internal political deadlock on the simple issue of protecting the interest and power of the state of New York, then let it. Do not let it however become a tool for the harming of all other States.

We must recognizes that harming someone only consist of doing something to them of your own accord which deprives them of their otherwise preexisting rights, it doesn’t not consecutive failing to protect them from themselves, or anyone else if not contracted.

Other people’s services are a privilege when wanted, not rights unless willfully contracted for by both parties.(provider and reserver)

The 17th amendments clearly did not fix the deadlock problem as the election of al Franklin proves. The people are just as capable of being in indecisive as the State legislators, at least in the legislator there is a democratic reason due to inability to agree on who to elect, rather then inability to agree on an election outcome.

If you wanted to fix it say repeal the 17th and say senators shall be elected by the state legislator and hold office until replaced. But that would cause more problems with the incumbent advantage merely needing to prevent a vote, its better to have no government then bad government. So I'm content to live with the "dead lock" problem, as long as we establish a quorum consist of at least 1 senator from every state.

Notably of course that will make the “dead lock” problem much more severe (one state could shut down congress by denying senators) in difference cases then just repealing the 17th amendment but again I contend that no Federal government is better then bad Federal government.

If all else fails the States have at least the means to defend themselves if actually invaded or such eminent danger of invasion as not to permit delay. So really it’s just reducing us to our basic elements.

Then again just repealing the 17th amendment and having the old “deadlock” problem constitutes a loss to the State in deadlock not to the whole of the united States so maybe they deserve to be unrepresented for the time they cant decide on a senator due to internal political wrangling.

It is not justifiable to screw over everyone just because one person is doing harm to themselves.

So in conclusion the best answer is simply repealing the 17th amendment, if New York wants to harm itself with internal political deadlock on the simple issue of protecting the interest and power of the state of New York, then let it. Do not let it however become a tool for the harming of all other States.

We must recognizes that harming someone only consist of doing something to them of your own accord which deprives them of their otherwise preexisting rights, it doesn’t not consecutive failing to protect them from themselves, or anyone else if not contracted.

Other people’s services are a privilege when wanted, not rights unless willfully contracted for by both parties.(provider and reserver)

Just repeal the 17th Amendement. Just because NY could not elect it senators is no reason to punish the other states. NY has always run this country politically. Each state had sovereign rights, but NY didn't care. It wanted populism and got it. The 16th Amendment must be repealed too.

---
REPEAL THE 16th AMENDMENT AND THE 17th AMENDMENT NOW TO RESTORE LIBERTY!

3 events got us into the crisis today. All the talk of petitions and the like to Congress and the President ignore the fundamental problem which transformed our nation from a liberty-loving Constitutional Republic to a liberty-destroying Socialist Democracy. Don’t doubt me. Time and again Conservatives and Libertarians ask the same questions. How do we restore our nation to its founding principles?

First, we must stop fighting Liberals, Liars, Statists, Socialists, and Communists are their terms. They stole our nation from us. They are the enemy. Populism is evil.

The 3 events that transformed our nation into a downward spiral are the 16th Amendment, the 17th Amendment, and the election of Woodrow Wilson. That’s it. Nothing more.

We must repeal the 16th Amendment and the 17th Amendment. These amendments empower the Left to oppress us. These amendments brought the Statists to power starting with Woodrow Wilson. These amendments enabled unlimited taxation and nationalized the several states. These amendments nationalized our country. These amendments are the root of our problems.

I’ll prove it. The Left and their evil cabal will never allow these amendments to be repealed. Period. A political revolution will have to take place to get these amendments repealed. The Left needs these amendments to continue socializing and nationalizing our nation.

All of the debates about policies and the like are framed within these amendments making the the Left the agenda makers and power-brokers. These amendments are the tools for enormous taxation imposed upon us by our unaccountable government. High taxes are the weapons used by the left to steal our liberties.

My children will be indentured servants of the Federal Government unless we repeal the 16th and 17th amendments. We are enslaved today by our Nationlized Government. We are living in Orwell’s 1984.

REPEAL THE 16th AMENDMENT AND THE 17th AMENDMENT NOW TO RESTORE LIBERTY!

Just repeal the 17th Amendement. Just because NY could not elect it senators is no reason to punish the other states. NY has always run this country politically. Each state had sovereign rights, but NY didn't care. It wanted populism and got it. The 16th Amendment must be repealed too.

---
REPEAL THE 16th AMENDMENT AND THE 17th AMENDMENT NOW TO RESTORE LIBERTY!

3 events got us into the crisis today. All the talk of petitions and the like to Congress and the President ignore the fundamental problem which transformed our nation from a liberty-loving Constitutional Republic to a liberty-destroying Socialist Democracy. Don’t doubt me. Time and again Conservatives and Libertarians ask the same questions. How do we restore our nation to its founding principles?

First, we must stop fighting Liberals, Liars, Statists, Socialists, and Communists are their terms. They stole our nation from us. They are the enemy. Populism is evil.

The 3 events that transformed our nation into a downward spiral are the 16th Amendment, the 17th Amendment, and the election of Woodrow Wilson. That’s it. Nothing more.

We must repeal the 16th Amendment and the 17th Amendment. These amendments empower the Left to oppress us. These amendments brought the Statists to power starting with Woodrow Wilson. These amendments enabled unlimited taxation and nationalized the several states. These amendments nationalized our country. These amendments are the root of our problems.

I’ll prove it. The Left and their evil cabal will never allow these amendments to be repealed. Period. A political revolution will have to take place to get these amendments repealed. The Left needs these amendments to continue socializing and nationalizing our nation.

All of the debates about policies and the like are framed within these amendments making the the Left the agenda makers and power-brokers. These amendments are the tools for enormous taxation imposed upon us by our unaccountable government. High taxes are the weapons used by the left to steal our liberties.

My children will be indentured servants of the Federal Government unless we repeal the 16th and 17th amendments. We are enslaved today by our Nationlized Government. We are living in Orwell’s 1984.

REPEAL THE 16th AMENDMENT AND THE 17th AMENDMENT NOW TO RESTORE LIBERTY!

The proposed amendment does not address the original problem that gave rise to the Seventeenth Amendment. From your article: "The 17th Amendment was passed because of a procedural problem in the original concept and not because of a need to alter the balance of power. The procedural problem consisted of frequent deadlocks when the state legislatures were trying to select a senator. When deadlocked, a state would go without representation in the Senate." The amendment should address this problem.

I agree enthusiastically that the 17th should be repealed, but I would like to hear more about the thought behind the language of your proposed amendment. I have two concerns: One, writing into the constitution that states may recall senators by majority vote of both legislative bodies would seem a bit heavy-handed, and in foreseeable cases could effectively limit senate terms to two years (every local election). Two, requiring liaison committees also seems like a bit of an oppressive intrusion. It's a good idea - for sure - but if a state has a better idea, they should be free to do that (or be idiots and do nothing at all - that's their right).

With all that said, the language you suggest is a very valuable addition to the debate. I really appreciate you putting it out there.

Say Yes to indigenous power and individual sovereignty! Check out COMMON SENSE; Revisited, a short pamphlet written with one purpose in mind: to light the fire of liberty that burns within every human heart. It explains how a return to founding principles can help us solve the many problems that face our country today. We believe it does justice to its predecessor, COMMON SENSE, written by Thomas Paine in 1776, which changed the course of the world. You can download the entire PDF for any price you choose (or purchase physical copies) at www.commonsenserevisited.org