- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why aren't these conservative geniuses talking about repealing the 17th?
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:07 am
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:07 am
Lots of gum flapping about changing the Consitution to enact term limits, nothing about repealing the 17th (which is more important IMO).
They don't understand the issue?
Know it won't happen?
They don't understand the issue?
Know it won't happen?
12
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:08 am to weagle99
quote:Probably
They don't understand the issue?
quote:
Know it won't happen?
Truth
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:09 am to weagle99
We're focused on the 19th.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:13 am to weagle99
quote:
Why aren't these conservative geniuses talking about repealing the 17th?
It's brought up on this board all the time.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:13 am to weagle99
I am absolutely for that.
The 17th Amendment is easily the most destructive amendment ever put in the Constitution. It was the death knell of federalism.
The 17th Amendment is easily the most destructive amendment ever put in the Constitution. It was the death knell of federalism.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:17 am to weagle99
I don't think it is a bad idea, and can think of some long-term benefits to reverting to that process, but I don't think it will happen.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:19 am to weagle99
No worries, the world changed on July 27th.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:21 am to weagle99
quote:
repealing the 17th (which is more important IMO)
Why in the world is this board so obsessed with not letting citizens vote for their own Senators directly? You all bitch about corruption 24/7, yet you advocate for one of the most corrupt systems of election.
Is it because you think it will help you gain more Senators? Because if we did repeal the 17th, you know who would be gone? The Tea Party, Rand Paul, and all your other favorites. It would be the ultimate establishment picks.
I seriously don't get it. You are advocating for something that goes completely against all the other things you like to advocate for.
*Usually, no one ever responds to me, but somehow, this thread blossoms up again day after day.
This post was edited on 8/2/17 at 9:30 am
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:30 am to 5thTiger
quote:
I seriously don't get it.
That's because you don't understand the concept of dual federalism, or the political theory behind why our government was set up the way it was.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:33 am to Centinel
quote:
political theory behind why our government was set up the way it was
really? try me. Because this board readily accepts a bunch of bullshite that they construe as "the way the founders intended", despite contradictory evidence from the founders themselves.
quote:
That's because you don't understand the concept of dual federalism
I understand it quite well. thanks though.
This post was edited on 8/2/17 at 9:34 am
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:34 am to 5thTiger
quote:
I understand it quite well.
Then you understand why the 17th Amendment was a bad idea. Great!
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:34 am to 5thTiger
quote:
I seriously don't get it. You are advocating for something that goes completely against all the other things you like to advocate for.
Like libs and muslims?
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:37 am to Centinel
quote:
Then you understand why the 17th Amendment was a bad idea.
Nope. Not at all. You have provided no logical argument other than, like I said, what you claim "the founders intended". Case Law throughout the 19th century defies what you claim... in a time before you can claim, "political justices".
Why do you think it was a bad idea? Why do you think repealing it would be the right decision now?
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:41 am to The Boat
quote:
Like libs and muslims?
Has literally nothing to do with the 17th amendment.
Talking Corruption/Establishment/Voting/etc. The things the 17th actually deals with, and its related topics.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:41 am to 5thTiger
quote:
Why in the world is this board so obsessed with not letting citizens vote for their own Senators directly? You all bitch about corruption 24/7, yet you advocate for one of the most corrupt systems of election.
Is it because you think it will help you gain more Senators? Because if we did repeal the 17th, you know who would be gone? The Tea Party, Rand Paul, and all your other favorites. It would be the ultimate establishment picks.
This statement evidences your misunderstanding (or ignorance) regarding the importance of the pre-17th Amendment system.
Regardless of corruption or party (and there was plenty of each), the "old" system required the Senators to be answerable to the STATE GOVERNMENTS, not the citizenry. That's what the House was for.
The Constitution (the Founders) realized that all governments will naturally seek to aggrandize power, so one necessary check on the national government was to let the states have a DIRECT influence on the national government (by giving it a direct influence on legislation).
Do you honestly think there would be unfunded mandates, or all sorts of other impositions on state authority, by the national government if Senators had to answer to the governors/legislators of their states? Do you think that the tax system would be so incredibly weighted to the feds so that it is almost impossible for states to raise taxes, resulting in some of the current fiscal situations that exist (some of which are due to required state spending under federal law)?
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:48 am to udtiger
quote:
This statement evidences your misunderstanding (or ignorance) regarding the importance of the pre-17th Amendment system
quote:
Regardless of corruption or party (and there was plenty of each), the "old" system required the Senators to be answerable to the STATE GOVERNMENTS, not the citizenry
quote:
The Constitution (the Founders) realized that all governments will naturally seek to aggrandize power, so one necessary check on the national government was to let the states have a DIRECT influence on the national government (by giving it a direct influence on legislation).
quote:
Do you honestly think there would be unfunded mandates, or all sorts of other impositions on state authority, by the national government if Senators had to answer to the governors/legislators of their states?
Yes.
quote:
Do you think that the tax system would be so incredibly weighted to the feds so that it is almost impossible for states to raise taxes, resulting in some of the current fiscal situations that exist (some of which are due to required state spending under federal law)?
Yes.
You all have an incredibly warped sense of history that you attempt to fit to your ideals. But its cool that you regurgitate the Allen Wests and Mike Huckabees of the world who have no fricking idea what they are talking about, but have the skill to talk and convince some that they do.
You all should study Congress prior to 1912. It is obvious that you have little to no understanding of how they actually operated.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:51 am to weagle99
It won't happen if only because those self absorbed shitheads in the upper chamber won't ratify it because most, if not all, of them wouldn't get reappointed.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:54 am to 5thTiger
quote:
You all should study Congress prior to 1912. It is obvious that you have little to no understanding of how they actually operated.
Obviously, you have not.
Otherwise, you would have seen hardly any legislation directly affecting states (and state governments) getting passed. It's no accident that the explosion of legislation and regulation interfering with and eroding/destroying state authority in favor of the feds comes after the ratification of the 17th Amendment.
But, please, feel free to use some more emojis.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:55 am to 5thTiger
quote:
You all have an incredibly warped sense of history that you attempt to fit to your ideals.
I'm sorry you're an idiot. My condolences to your family.
Posted on 8/2/17 at 9:57 am to teke184
quote:
It won't happen if only because those self absorbed shitheads in the upper chamber won't ratify it because most, if not all, of them wouldn't get reappointed
This is why Levin (and others) has been calling for an Article V convention.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News