Utah looking to repeal 17th amendment

[Contumacious]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

Comrade Starkiev, confused as always - I know that in the good ol' USSR the government was supreme .

Did the Sovereign State of Utah vote to ratify the 17th Amenmdent?

Me don't think so.


The Constitution of the United States
* * * * * * * * * *

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.


So STFU

 

[Wry Catcher]

The conservative wing of the Republican Party of today hates democracy.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

2 Thumbs just hand your butt to ya.
Care to comment?????

 

[tyroneweaver]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

link

Not necessary. Everyone from Utah understands the Zion mafia.

The key word there is ,"from."

 

[Contumacious]

The conservative wing of the Republican Party of today hates democracy.

I do not know if "conservatives" do or not. I doubt it.

But the Founding Fathers and the Libertarians do. Tyranny by the majority is tyranny nevertheless.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

2 Thumbs just hand your butt to ya.
Care to comment?????

Yup, it is corrupt. It does not represent the will of the people on so many matters, not the least electoral reform, the which required legislative votes then the courts to force the GOP to comply to what it agreed.

What the far right says about is immaterial, for criminals like them always lie.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The conservative wing of the Republican Party of today hates democracy.

I do not know if "conservatives" do or not. I doubt it.

But the Founding Fathers and the Libertarians do. Tyranny by the majority is tyranny nevertheless.

Libertarians' are lunatics; the founders were pragmatic, hence we have a democratic republic. As for the current conservative iteration, they echo the phrase constitutional republic in an effort to mislead others into believing we the people are an afterthought.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Contumacious is only an expert on one thing, and it is not government.

Tell people what you are really expert about, Conty. Don't be shy.

 

[g5000]

James Madison made the following argument for electing by state legislatures in Federalist Paper No. 62:

It is equally unnecessary to dilate on the appointment of senators by the State legislatures. Among the various modes which might have been devised for constituting this branch of the government, that which has been proposed by the convention is probably the most congenial with the public opinion. It is recommended by the double advantage of favoring a select appointment, and of giving to the State governments such an agency in the formation of the federal government as must secure the authority of the former, and may form a convenient link between the two systems.

In other words, Madison was saying this method reinforced the authority of the states over the federal government.

So why did our country feel it necessary to change that?

First, it was widely believed that state legislators were easily bought. There were several cases of such corruption which fed into this belief. And one only has to pick up a local newspaper to see this is still true today.

Second, just ponder how often the US Senate is deadlocked today by partisans. The same was true of state legislatures.

Between 1891 and 1905, 46 elections were deadlocked, in 20 different states; in one extreme example, a Senate seat for Delaware went unfilled from 1899 until 1903. The business of holding elections also caused great disruption in the state legislatures, with a full third of the Oregon House of Representatives choosing not to swear the oath of office in 1897 due to a dispute over an open Senate seat. The result was that the legislature was unable to pass legislation that year.

By the time the 17th amendment was a viable proposal, 33 states had already changed their election laws so that their Senators were chosen by popular vote. 31 state legislatures had passed resolutions calling for a Constitutional amendment allowing popular vote, and ten Republicans who opposed an amendment lost their seats. 27 states were calling for a constitutional convention, with 31 being the threshold.


But there is yet more to this than meets the eye. Much more.

You see, in the past voter district lines were based on geography, not population. Voting districts were given equal geographic size, the result of which was rural votes were seriously overweighted. There might be 20 times as many people in an urban voting district, but they were given one representative in the state legislature, and the rural district was also given one representative in the state legislature even though it had much fewer people in it.

In such a scheme, one can see how the votes of rural voters, who tend to be conservatives, greatly outweigh the votes of urban voters (who tend to be liberal).

Three Supreme Court decisions changed all that. These are known as the "one man, one vote" decisions. District lines are now based on population.


But...US Senate districts (the states) are still based on geography. And there are still more rural states than heavily urbanized states.

You can see where this is going.

This means, on the Senate district level, rural states' votes continue to be more heavily weighted than urbanized states with the result that 27 state legislatures are Republican controlled, while only 17 state legislatures are Democratic controlled. The rest are split.

Consequently, the immediate result of repealing the 17th amendment would result in 54 GOP Senators, 34 Democratic Senators, with the rest being a tossup. The Republicans would gain a majority in the Senate.

I believe that is the real purpose of the drive to repeal the 17th amendment, with the restoring-states-authority-over-the-federal-government argument just the thinnest of smokescreens.


Have at it.

 

[OKTexas]

Actually it would bring the loyalty of senators back to the State instead of large donors, the Senate was intended to be the States house, the House of Reps was intended to be the peoples house. That all went to shit with the 17th.

how do you figure?

seems to me it would add another, bribe-able, middleman.

If a senator isn't attending to the State interests the legislature can replace him at the end of his term, there's no reason to have a reelection war chest, just doing a good job for the State would determine if they are returned to DC. And when it comes to bribes, 60 senators would be much easier to bribe than the majority of 50 State legislatures.

Wal-mart, Verizon, Sony, AT&T are multi billion dollar companies.

how much harder do you think it would be to bribe 50 locals that make less than the 60 senators?

keep in mind how easily people fall for the spin

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said the majority of 50 State legislatures, that would be several hundred individuals. Also legislators would be less likely to fall for the spin than the individual voters. As it is now the incumbent has a 80+% chance of reelection. If they're not looking out for the State the legislature would be in the best position to know that, they have to deal with all the federal BS.

you lack communication skills, so that's on you.

also you have a hard time with reality

megacorps are in all 50 states and around the world, making it easy for them to bribe the locals.

and by spin, I meant spin coming from the politicians, that's where spin comes from.

Well thanks for letting me know that your mind is made up, and you're not looking for a discussion unless it comports with you. BYE

 

[JakeStarkey]

how do you figure?

seems to me it would add another, bribe-able, middleman.

If a senator isn't attending to the State interests the legislature can replace him at the end of his term, there's no reason to have a reelection war chest, just doing a good job for the State would determine if they are returned to DC. And when it comes to bribes, 60 senators would be much easier to bribe than the majority of 50 State legislatures.

Wal-mart, Verizon, Sony, AT&T are multi billion dollar companies.

how much harder do you think it would be to bribe 50 locals that make less than the 60 senators?

keep in mind how easily people fall for the spin

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said the majority of 50 State legislatures, that would be several hundred individuals. Also legislators would be less likely to fall for the spin than the individual voters. As it is now the incumbent has a 80+% chance of reelection. If they're not looking out for the State the legislature would be in the best position to know that, they have to deal with all the federal BS.

you lack communication skills, so that's on you.

also you have a hard time with reality

megacorps are in all 50 states and around the world, making it easy for them to bribe the locals.

and by spin, I meant spin coming from the politicians, that's where spin comes from.

Well thanks for letting me know that your mind is made up, and you're not looking for a discussion unless it comport with you. BYE

Grow up, OK. Your mind was made up before this.

 

[OKTexas]

If a senator isn't attending to the State interests the legislature can replace him at the end of his term, there's no reason to have a reelection war chest, just doing a good job for the State would determine if they are returned to DC. And when it comes to bribes, 60 senators would be much easier to bribe than the majority of 50 State legislatures.

Wal-mart, Verizon, Sony, AT&T are multi billion dollar companies.

how much harder do you think it would be to bribe 50 locals that make less than the 60 senators?

keep in mind how easily people fall for the spin

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said the majority of 50 State legislatures, that would be several hundred individuals. Also legislators would be less likely to fall for the spin than the individual voters. As it is now the incumbent has a 80+% chance of reelection. If they're not looking out for the State the legislature would be in the best position to know that, they have to deal with all the federal BS.

you lack communication skills, so that's on you.

also you have a hard time with reality

megacorps are in all 50 states and around the world, making it easy for them to bribe the locals.

and by spin, I meant spin coming from the politicians, that's where spin comes from.

Well thanks for letting me know that your mind is made up, and you're not looking for a discussion unless it comport with you. BYE

Grow up, OK. Your mind was made up before this.

Only because I think the founders got it right the first time. You regressive sodomite enablers can fuck off as far as I'm concerned.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wal-mart, Verizon, Sony, AT&T are multi billion dollar companies.

how much harder do you think it would be to bribe 50 locals that make less than the 60 senators?

keep in mind how easily people fall for the spin

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said the majority of 50 State legislatures, that would be several hundred individuals. Also legislators would be less likely to fall for the spin than the individual voters. As it is now the incumbent has a 80+% chance of reelection. If they're not looking out for the State the legislature would be in the best position to know that, they have to deal with all the federal BS.

you lack communication skills, so that's on you.

also you have a hard time with reality

megacorps are in all 50 states and around the world, making it easy for them to bribe the locals.

and by spin, I meant spin coming from the politicians, that's where spin comes from.

Well thanks for letting me know that your mind is made up, and you're not looking for a discussion unless it comport with you. BYE

Grow up, OK. Your mind was made up before this.

Only because I think the founders got it right the first time. You regressive sodomite enablers can fuck off as far as I'm concerned.

So you are up for slavery and female oppression and destruction of native cultures OK.

 

[BluesLegend]

Hey you state rights advocates, sadly the States are more corrupt than the Federal government. The goal after getting elected is about how much money, bribes, and gifts you can grab for yourself.

 

[Care4all]

The Utah Senate Asks Congress to Repeal the 17th Amendment


“The framers of the Constitution created the United States Senate to protect the rights of individual states and safeguard minority opinion in a system of government designed to give greater power to the national government. They modeled the Senate on governors’ councils of the colonial era and on the state senates that had evolved since independence. The framers intended the Senate to be an independent body of responsible citizens who would share power with the president and the House of Representatives. James Madison, paraphrasing Edmund Randolph, explained in his notes that the Senate’s role was “first to protect the people against their rulers [and] secondly to protect the people against the transient impressions into which they themselves might be led.”



The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.[1]

17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Direct Election of U.S. Senators. Americans did not directly vote for senators for the first 125 years of the Federal Government. The Constitution, as it was adopted in 1788, stated that senators would be elected by state legislatures.




I can understand why they would want that, but the idea that it would end corruption is silly, you're just spreading it around.

Actually it would bring the loyalty of senators back to the State instead of large donors, the Senate was intended to be the States house, the House of Reps was intended to be the peoples house. That all went to shit with the 17th.

Nope, it would be much easier to bribe them in the State. That is why the amendment passed.

precisely!

local and state gvts are corrupt....

they don't call it Chicago politics fer nuthin'

besides, the states have their say at the federal level with all the gerrymandering they've done within the States to give them their representatives...

 

[Two Thumbs]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

2 Thumbs just hand your butt to ya.
Care to comment?????

Yup, it is corrupt. It does not represent the will of the people on so many matters, not the least electoral reform, the which required legislative votes then the courts to force the GOP to comply to what it agreed.

What the far right says about is immaterial, for criminals like them always lie.

I provided you a link that put them 7th on the least corrupt.

so please stop lying or leave.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

2 Thumbs just hand your butt to ya.
Care to comment?????

Yup, it is corrupt. It does not represent the will of the people on so many matters, not the least electoral reform, the which required legislative votes then the courts to force the GOP to comply to what it agreed.

What the far right says about is immaterial, for criminals like them always lie.

I provided you a link that put them 7th on the least corrupt. so please stop lying or leave.

You are nobody. Corrupt is more than money or graft or bribes. The legislature has been corrupt because it has not represented the will of the people, only the will of a small group of activists. Study up on it.

 

[Two Thumbs]

how do you figure?

seems to me it would add another, bribe-able, middleman.

If a senator isn't attending to the State interests the legislature can replace him at the end of his term, there's no reason to have a reelection war chest, just doing a good job for the State would determine if they are returned to DC. And when it comes to bribes, 60 senators would be much easier to bribe than the majority of 50 State legislatures.

Wal-mart, Verizon, Sony, AT&T are multi billion dollar companies.

how much harder do you think it would be to bribe 50 locals that make less than the 60 senators?

keep in mind how easily people fall for the spin

I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said the majority of 50 State legislatures, that would be several hundred individuals. Also legislators would be less likely to fall for the spin than the individual voters. As it is now the incumbent has a 80+% chance of reelection. If they're not looking out for the State the legislature would be in the best position to know that, they have to deal with all the federal BS.

you lack communication skills, so that's on you.

also you have a hard time with reality

megacorps are in all 50 states and around the world, making it easy for them to bribe the locals.

and by spin, I meant spin coming from the politicians, that's where spin comes from.

Well thanks for letting me know that your mind is made up, and you're not looking for a discussion unless it comports with you. BYE

I hadn't made up my mind, I didn't think you were an asshole until you insulted me w/o reason.

so please go fuck yourself you thin skinned pussy.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Hey you state rights advocates, sadly the States are more corrupt than the Federal government. The goal after getting elected is about how much money, bribes, and gifts you can grab for yourself.

link

 

[Two Thumbs]

Utah's state senate is one of the most corrupt in the US, barring Louisiana and New Jersey.

The state GOP is afraid Lee will get beaten this fall.

2 Thumbs just hand your butt to ya.
Care to comment?????

Yup, it is corrupt. It does not represent the will of the people on so many matters, not the least electoral reform, the which required legislative votes then the courts to force the GOP to comply to what it agreed.

What the far right says about is immaterial, for criminals like them always lie.

I provided you a link that put them 7th on the least corrupt. so please stop lying or leave.

You are nobody. Corrupt is more than money or graft or bribes. The legislature has been corrupt because it has not represented the will of the people, only the will of a small group of activists. Study up on it.

I proved your assumption to be wrong, by a wide margin, but instead of reading up and learning that you are ignorant of the facts, you keep lying, further proving you're nothing but a poser.

I pity the people nearest to you.