To Deliver Real Senate Rule Changes, Repeal The 17th Amendment

[Bigun]

I'm pretty divided on the 17th. I don't see the advantage of the State Senate appointing a Senator. If someone can enlighten me, I'd appreciate it.

What could happen is the state senate could be rigged and appoint a pre-chosen person. Could they not?

The 17th cut off one leg of the three legged stool of government our founders designed.  The states no longer have any representative in Washington because of it.  It was a terrible mistake that moved us further toward direct democracy, which the founders to a man abhorred, and socialism.

[Bigun]

The Legislatures. Governors commonly picked replacements if they did not finish their term, but that depended on the State.

And let's not forget the most important factor here.  State legislatures could recall misbehaving senators at ANY time and replace them with someone else.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

And let's not forget the most important factor here.  State legislatures could recall misbehaving senators at ANY time and replace them with someone else.

Interesting. I did not know that.

[Cripplecreek]

And let's not forget the most important factor here.  State legislatures could recall misbehaving senators at ANY time and replace them with someone else.

I'd love to find a good history of the debate over the 17th amendment from the time of passage. It passed under false pretenses and should be rendered void based on that fact alone.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I'd love to find a good history of the debate over the 17th amendment from the time of passage. It passed under false pretenses and should be rendered void based on that fact alone.

Rendered void?

[Bigun]

I'd love to find a good history of the debate over the 17th amendment from the time of passage. It passed under false pretenses and should be rendered void based on that fact alone.

I agree!  That's exactly why that history  is difficult to find and what you do find has been sanitized greatly.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

And let's not forget the most important factor here.  State legislatures could recall misbehaving senators at ANY time and replace them with someone else.

Interesting tidbit.

So the 17th Amendment took that recall away from the state authority and gave it to who?

This document says the states never had that power to recall, and no Senator has ever been recalled.

https://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/ee067ba0-db71-4394-9a37-453316aeb453.pdf

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Interesting tidbit.

So the 17th Amendment took that recall away from the state authority and gave it to who?

This document says the states never had that power to recall, and no Senator has ever been recalled.

https://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/ee067ba0-db71-4394-9a37-453316aeb453.pdf

@Bigun - did you find out the facts of the case here?

[EC]

He will. Know he's on the road for the next couple days though, so you may need some patience. 

[Bigun]

Interesting tidbit.

So the 17th Amendment took that recall away from the state authority and gave it to who?

This document says the states never had that power to recall, and no Senator has ever been recalled.

https://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/ee067ba0-db71-4394-9a37-453316aeb453.pdf

@IsailedawayfromFR

Your document is correct and I was wrong in saying that they (senators) could be recalled at any time.  When I said that I was recalling the several incidents when state legislatures have refused to reappoint sitting senators.  My apologies for the error.

One should note however that if there were no 17th amendment the current makeup of the senate would be somewhere in the neighborhood  of 64 Republicans and 36 democrats  given the current make up of the 50 state legislatures.  That is perfectly illustrative of the problem with that amendment.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

@IsailedawayfromFR

Your document is correct and I was wrong in saying that they (senators) could be recalled at any time.  When I said that I was recalling the several incidents when state legislatures have refused to reappoint sitting senators.  My apologies for the error.

One should note however that if there were no 17th amendment the current makeup of the senate would be somewhere in the neighborhood  of 64 Republicans and 36 democrats  given the current make up of the 50 state legislatures.  That is perfectly illustrative of the problem with that amendment.

What I believe you did highlight is the current inability to recall a sitting US Senator.  From what I read, only the Senate chamber can remove one of its members.

This may bear some thought on how to change this for the better, as no one should have this distinction of having no accountability to the state one serves or the people of that state.

[Bigun]

What I believe you did highlight is the current inability to recall a sitting US Senator.  From what I read, only the Senate chamber can remove one of its members.

This may bear some thought on how to change this for the better, as no one should have this distinction of having no accountability to the state one serves or the people of that state.

I continue to believe that the founders had it right to begin with and that is EXACTLY why the leftist had to get it changed!

[Smokin Joe]

What I believe you did highlight is the current inability to recall a sitting US Senator.  From what I read, only the Senate chamber can remove one of its members.

This may bear some thought on how to change this for the better, as no one should have this distinction of having no accountability to the state one serves or the people of that state.

If the 17th could be repealed, then the recall ability should reside with the electors, in that case, the Legislature.
If not, I'd still like to have the ability to recall Representatives or Senators. We can do this on the State Level, we should be able to do so on the Federal Level, too.

[Fishrrman]

Repealing the 17th is fantasy.

Never going to happen (outside of an Article V convention).

While you're at it, you may as well advocate repeal of the 19th. It would do a lot more good!