rschwank

Representatives from Georgia want to repeal the 17th Amendment to the Constitution which gives We the People the right to vote for Senators. The Federal government wants to take from We the People any and all amendments which may take away some of the Federal government control - Do you agree? They already have too much control of our lives! What is with this government? They will not be happy until they have complete control over all the citizens - DICTATORSHIP or COMMUNISM? We the People do not want either!!! The more people who learn about this may help. We sure hope so!!!

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Do you understand who elected the Senators before that amendment was passed? Why the people, of course. The Constitution provided that the State legislatures elect the Senators and some are in favor of going back to the original plan.

rschwank

If you go back to the legislators, you have government voting more government into office. We don't think so! Someone needs to watch the governments - State and Federal. They are all ripping off the taxpayers at every chance.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I am not sure I want to go on with what we have. That would be because the Senate is still a good old boys club and operates like that even with the present way of electing them. The original method was meant to allow state legislatures to have some say in what those people do. I am wondering if I am not about to change my mind about it all.

ABBAsFernando Loc: Ohio

Our founding fathers established the position of Senator as a sort of representative of their respective State charged with protecting their State to the Federal government. It was envisioned as a way to keep in check Federal power over States.

Congressmen were representatives of We the People before the Federal Government.

One good way to consider the pros and cons is to compare both systems in the actual practice. Did the system work before the 17th Amendment? What changed after this Amendment? Which worked better and why!

loybanks

Not only NO...But HELL NO!

Loki Loc: Georgia

I am in favor of repealing the 17th for the following reasons: Senators were originally elected by State Legislatures, who were far more responsive to the voters, having to stand for re election every two years. The whole purpose was to empower the States, and keep the Federal Government in check. Since the 17th Amendment was passed in 1913, we have developed what amounts to an oligarchy in the upper house. The 17th Amendment was passed during the administration of Comrade Woodrow Wilson, with help from his Chief of Staff, Comrade Colonel Edward House, (nee Huis). To give you a frame of reference, House was an admitted Communist, and, together with Wilson, was responsible for the passage of the Income Tax, creation of the Federal Reserve, removing us from the gold standard to pave the way for fractional banking, fiat money and inflation on demand, the Inheritance tax, and got us into WWI after being re elected on a platform of "He kept us out of War." (Historical trivia, completely unrelated; the "Lusitania" was in fact listed as an auxilliary warship of the British Navy, and the German Government had, for several weeks prior to it's sinking, taken out ads in every major New York newspaper warning civilians not to book passage on this vessel. Such warnings were still being published at the time of the sinking, but I digress).Given the fact that these two scoundrels, who were responible for more damage to the US Consitution than any administration before or since, supported the 17th Amendment, I will allow you to draw your own conclusions. This amendment is designed to increase the power of the Federal Government at the expense of the States.

johntvalentine

I am a VERY, very firm believer, that our beloved America's Constitution, is a gift from God. Why do the evil progressives, not want a sacred precious gift from God? Wake up America. All school and college students should study our beloved American History. The TRUTH, about our Four Fathers, Founders on America.

johntvalentine

Thank you ever so much. They say the absolute TRUTH, shall make one free. My eyes have been opened. State Sovereigntry, is the only key for the future success of our beloved America. Small Federal Government, Power to the States, is the only answer.

LAwrence

Since the states lost the power to elect the president, our government has deteriorated to the point where the latest love feast will fool most americans and get us presidents like Obama.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Jack, I really do wonder if anyone has seen what you said about why the Senators were elected by State legislators in the beginning. I don't think many of them will be able to understand what you said about who it was who was responsible for the introduction of the change along with all the other things that Wilson was involved with. Actually, I am pretty sure that the progs on here won't accept your words about Wilson, although only a blind prog could fail to see it all.

Loki Loc: Georgia

Oldroy, as I said, the original intent was to have the Senators more closely tied to their State. The Federal Government was never, ever intended to become the monstrosity we have today. Please read my post "The USSA has arrived, along with Tasine's extra commentary on it. It's much simpler than going into another long winded explanation here. Thanks for reading my posts.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I read your posts because you seem to be better informed about our history than most here, but I do not agree about doing away with the 17th Amendment. I fail to agree because the Congress isn't about to propose an amendment to do that and that leaves us with a constitutional convention to propose it. You do know what happened the last time a group was called on to give some thought to prettying up the existing constitution, don't you? What would happen if Congressmen were involved in appointing the members of that convention? I think that they would have a large group of progressives involved and I don't want to see that.

Loki Loc: Georgia

Valid points. There is a way around this,( I need to do some research), which involves a referendum. I'm not sure of the exact mechanism, but I'll research it. Thanks for reading. As for my knowedge of history, I'll admit to that, bearing in mind my motto when doing historical research, that "History is written by the winners." There is a psychology involved also, in that in order to understand why people did what they did, you have to try and understand the "mindset" (for lack of a better term) which was prevalent at the time, This changes quite rapidly. Look, for instance, at the changing attitudes about the military. It is far more popular today than in the seventies when I was in. Attitudes change, along with subjective values.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

History is written by the winners but usually the changes in the societies of both the winners and the losers are mixed before it is over. We always talked about that in college history classes and the one thing we always agreed on was that it was the point of reference that determined what was written. In other words, it is where the writer is standing at the time.

Just today I read a few things about what is about to happen with the military concerning religion and I have to wonder what people will think once it does. I have a thread about what is happening that we don't know from the MSM on the forum right now. Reading these things scared the hell out of me thinking about the stories about Obama wanting to weaken our military. I think that he has maybe, completely destroyed the whole thing.

I remember in the mid-50s when I was in the Army how the general population didn't really care for us. However, I met some very good people who didn't dislike us, at all. Thinking about that reminds me of a great married couple (they were around back then) who allowed two of us in uniform to sit with them in a very crowded restaurant. They were teachers of English, one in Boston U and the other at Boston College. I played a dirty trick on them about what life in western Kansas was like at that time. They didn't get mad, at all, when I told them I had been stringing them along.