The amendment says voters get to decide who represents them in the Senate. Before its ratification in 1913, legislatures elected senators.
As you can imagine, the old system reeked of dealmaking, bribery and corruption.
The poster boy for reform was Montana’s William Clark, a copper-mining magnate who bought a Senate seat in 1899 by paying $2,500 to each legislator to vote for him. So egregious was the scheme that the Senate refused to seat him.
Here’s what Mark Twain had to say about Clark:
“He is as rotten a human being as can be found anywhere under the flag; he is a shame to the American nation, and no one has helped to send him to the Senate who did not know that his proper place was the penitentiary, with a ball and chain on his legs.”
I think the idea of repeal of the 17th amendment has been talked about here. I think it has something to do with states having a vested interest in keeping the federal government out of their business, which would create a mechanism for a smaller federal government since states would have to approve of new laws.
I think the idea of repeal of the 17th amendment has been talked about here. I think it has something to do with states having a vested interest in keeping the federal government out of their business, which would create a mechanism for a smaller federal government since states would have to approve of new laws.
Terrible idea. Been tried. All you get is rich guys buying their way in.
Why would anyone want to give up their vote?
I can't understand right wing thinking.
Very nice. I applaud your explanation.
Terrible idea. Been tried. All you get is rich guys buying their way in.
Why would anyone want to give up their vote?
I can't understand right wing thinking.
Because that doesn't happen now. :ssst:
Well, I agree that it is a bad idea, but that was the argument as I remember it.
Oh, I, as a tea party member did not say I support it. I just thought mega's explaination was pretty good.
Well, weak minded partisan brainwashed freaks don't use their heads and THINK. They just follow along and agree with anything the Tea Party nutjobs put forth. And most of these Tea Party wackos ARE RICH ELITE assholes who'd LOVE to buy a Senate seat instead of having to run for election.
Let's just breathe Queen, Breathe, deep breaths happy thoughts, wooosa...
We still have a vote.
Why would you want to give it up?
Because appointing senators tempers the rule of the federal government. It keeps federalism alive by giving states a say in Washington. When the states have more power, they can dictate what policies work best for them instead of dealing with a top down federal approach.
LOL!!! Sure....
You totally followed along because you thought it was a good idea with his explanation. Then when you found out he doesn't agree with it, you backed down, just like the Republican candidates who are suddenly backing down now.
What a bunch of idiots these tea baggers are.
I'm for anything that stops or limits the constant election cycle.
A pretty lady like you with such a vulgar mouth.... :doh
An ugly man like you with such a male chauvinist attitude. Oh wait, that makes sense.
I can't. My country is filled with complete idiots!!!!!
Because appointing senators tempers the rule of the federal government. It keeps federalism alive by giving states a say in Washington. When the states have more power, they can dictate what policies work best for them instead of dealing with a top down federal approach.
So acccording to Queen, you are a teabagging idiot..... :2razz::shock::lamo
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?