Utah looking to repeal 17th amendment

[OKTexas]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How do you figure?

we elect our reps directly or elect reps that elect the reps.

seems like it more of the same.

It's the difference between direct democracy and being a republic.

 

[Contumacious]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How did it destroy States Rights?

Each state still has two Senators

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment

The citizens of the states were to be represented by their state legislatures. As Roger Sherman wrote in a letter to John Adams: "The senators, being . . . dependent on [state legislatures] for reelection, will be vigilant in supporting their rights against infringement by the legislative or executive of the United States."

Rossum also quotes Hamilton as saying that the election of senators by state legislatures would be an "absolute safeguard" against federal tyranny. George Mason believed that the appointment of senators by state legislatures would give the citizens of the states "some means of defending themselves against encroachments of the National Government."

 

[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.

link

www.ignorantuninformedvoter.com

another person that makes a claim but can't prove it.

I swear I'm a magnet for ignorant uninformed liberals, do you people ever read the news? Who's the latest in a long list of corrupt NY politicians heading to prison? I doubt you know. Please refrain from voting or operating a DVD player.

you made a claim, I asked for a link that proved your claim.

you failed

not my fault you think your assumption is fact.

Tune in next week when TwoThumbs demands proof the earth orbits the sun. /eyeroll

 

[rightwinger]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How did it destroy States Rights?

Each state still has two Senators

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment

The citizens of the states were to be represented by their state legislatures. As Roger Sherman wrote in a letter to John Adams: "The senators, being . . . dependent on [state legislatures] for reelection, will be vigilant in supporting their rights against infringement by the legislative or executive of the United States."

Rossum also quotes Hamilton as saying that the election of senators by state legislatures would be an "absolute safeguard" against federal tyranny. George Mason believed that the appointment of senators by state legislatures would give the citizens of the states "some means of defending themselves against encroachments of the National Government."

Irrelevant

States are still composed of citizens of those states. Those citizens directly elect Senators who represent the STATE in Congress

There is no change in states rights...each state still gets two Senators

 

[Contumacious]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How did it destroy States Rights?

Each state still has two Senators

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment

The citizens of the states were to be represented by their state legislatures. As Roger Sherman wrote in a letter to John Adams: "The senators, being . . . dependent on [state legislatures] for reelection, will be vigilant in supporting their rights against infringement by the legislative or executive of the United States."

Rossum also quotes Hamilton as saying that the election of senators by state legislatures would be an "absolute safeguard" against federal tyranny. George Mason believed that the appointment of senators by state legislatures would give the citizens of the states "some means of defending themselves against encroachments of the National Government."

Irrelevant

States are still composed of citizens of those states. Those citizens directly elect Senators who represent the STATE in Congress

There is no change in states rights...each state still gets two Senators

To the socialists, the berners, the ignorant, those who minds have been enslaved the issue may be irrelevant. Utah a state of the uion who VOTED against the 17th Amendment and who does not want to be deprive of suffrage in the Senate says different. I go with Utah.

.

 

[kaz]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How do you figure?

we elect our reps directly or elect reps that elect the reps.

seems like it more of the same.

Because US Senators get power through the Federal government. State government power is undermined when the Feds get more power. It's about self interest.

That's why the checks and balances between the 3 Federal branches of government doesn't work. In the end they all have the same objective of Federal power

 

[rightwinger]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How did it destroy States Rights?

Each state still has two Senators

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment

The citizens of the states were to be represented by their state legislatures. As Roger Sherman wrote in a letter to John Adams: "The senators, being . . . dependent on [state legislatures] for reelection, will be vigilant in supporting their rights against infringement by the legislative or executive of the United States."

Rossum also quotes Hamilton as saying that the election of senators by state legislatures would be an "absolute safeguard" against federal tyranny. George Mason believed that the appointment of senators by state legislatures would give the citizens of the states "some means of defending themselves against encroachments of the National Government."

Irrelevant

States are still composed of citizens of those states. Those citizens directly elect Senators who represent the STATE in Congress

There is no change in states rights...each state still gets two Senators

To the socialists, the berners, the ignorant, those who minds have been enslaved the issue may be irrelevant. Utah a state of the uion who VOTED against the 17th Amendment and who does not want to be deprive of suffrage in the Senate says different. I go with Utah.

.

Last I checked, Utah has two Senators representing them....just like every other state

 

[rightwinger]

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.

That would be great, it's the worst Constitutional Amendment in American history because it so destroyed State rights and the only real check and balance in government to limit Federal power

How do you figure?

we elect our reps directly or elect reps that elect the reps.

seems like it more of the same.

Because US Senators get power through the Federal government. State government power is undermined when the Feds get more power. It's about self interest.

That's why the checks and balances between the 3 Federal branches of government doesn't work. In the end they all have the same objective of Federal power

US Senators get power through the voters in their state

 

[bendog]

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.

I certainly didn't agree with Senator Bennett on abortion, but he was a decent and honest man, and what cost him his seat was actually proposing that taxes be collected to provide individuals with tax credits to directly purchase healthcare in a free market. I hope Lee chokes on a bone.

 

[rightwinger]

Can we just stop the charade about repealing the 17th amendment because of States rights or the wishes of the founding fathers?

Republicans control the majority of the State Legislatures. Repealing the 17th would ensure they have a majority of the Senate regardless of the will of the people in that state

Just another ploy for Republicans to rule from a minority

 

[JakeStarkey]

thank you, an honest opinion like pulling teeth. so you want the gop to control who gets elected and not the people?

Mischaracterization by you again. See, you can't understand because your intellect is limited. The GOP, I said, wants to control who gets selected, not the people.

so the answer to my question is yes but you insult me b/c you couldn't grasp a basic question that was meant to clarify what you said. moran

I said the GOP. How you get to me that I am the "GOP" in Utah is rather disingenuous. I prefer by far the new primary system in Utah that the hardliners in the GOP had forced on them.

 

[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.

Lunatics which translated from Orwellian double-talk means astute

Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."[1][16]

James Madison

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.

Lunatics which translated from Orwellian double-talk means astute. SIC - astupe



Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."[1][16]

James Madison

No. 10 addresses the question of how to guard against "factions", or groups of citizens, with interests contrary to the rights of others or the interests of the whole community, one wonders how he would have measured the NRA and their followers in this context and the ruling of Scalia in Heller.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It's the difference between direct democracy and being a republic.

And We the People, basically said, that the Founders got this portion of it wrong.

You and Two Thumbs are peas in a pod, one on the left and one on the right.

You only hear what you want to hear.

 

[JakeStarkey]

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.

Lunatics which translated from Orwellian double-talk means astute

Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."[1][16]

James Madison

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.

Lunatics which translated from Orwellian double-talk means astute. SIC - astupe



Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."[1][16]

James Madison

No. 10 addresses the question of how to guard against "factions", or groups of citizens, with interests contrary to the rights of others or the interests of the whole community, one wonders how he would have measured the NRA and their followers in this context.

The state senates of the Great Basin and the Rocky Mountains and the Upper Plains are dominated by the NRA.

 

[rightwinger]

Can we just stop the charade about repealing the 17th amendment because of States rights or the wishes of the founding fathers?

Republicans control the majority of the State Legislatures. Repealing the 17th would ensure they have a majority of the Senate regardless of the will of the people in that state

Just another ploy for Republicans to rule from a minority

Republicans have modified state districts to ensure unpopulated regions of the state get equal representation to highly populated cities. This has given them the state legislatures

Now, they want to use this same redistricting to ensure they control the US Senate

 

[SuperDemocrat]

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.

Jews just piss you off...don't they bro?

 

[SuperDemocrat]

I kind of like the idea that laws that affect the states and are enforced within the states should actually get approval from the states themselves. Once they started popular election of senators the federal government was completely cut off from the state governments. It can essentially do whatever it wants without the consent of the states themselves. I would be a lot happier if we just had a senate without the house of representatives.

 

[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.

link

Not necessary. Everyone from Utah understands the Zion mafia.

Jews just piss you off...don't they bro?

"Zion mafia" means the LDS control in Zion, which means Utah to Mormons.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

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.

Jews just piss you off...don't they bro?

"Zion mafia" means the LDS control in Zion, which means Utah to them.

Oh...I see. Did you know ****** patrol isn't racist? It just refers to black people who get in gangs.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

More bad faith partisanism from the right, and republicans once again placing party before country.