the 17th amendment put senators to a popular vote rather than being chosen by state representatives.
in general, state representatives skew conservative because they have to come from all parts of the state, whereas the popular votes for a senator only come from the population centers of the state. in other words, all the "flyover counties" of states have no real say in who their senator is right now. the 17th amendment, in some sense, removed an electoral college for choosing senators.
if you repeal the 17th amendment, the end result is that all the rural county voters will have a larger say in who their senator is.
right now, in a state like montana, the relatively liberal cities like missoula and bozeman get to unilaterally pick who the senator is because they have a lot more retarded urbanites who vote for whomever the TV tells them to. but montana's state legislature will be conservative for a long time into the future.
The 17th was pushed by special interests who wanted to influence Senators but not be restricted by the will of state governments.
When our federal system was created, states were worried that the federal government would wield unrestricted power upon the them. Our Founders knew a House of Representatives could easily be influenced by the short-term whims of the people - who can easily be manipulated with propaganda. So, the states said "we don't want to lose our right to self govern if we join this new union." The solution was to create a Senate, where the Senators represented the interests of the states, and protected state sovereignty and states' rights. In addition, they didn't want the Senators to be elected by a popular vote, like the House, because a single Senator was easier to corrupt than 51% of a state legislature. Therefore, the Senators were to be elected by the state legislatures. The results was that Senators would NOT vote for bills that went against the interests of the states because those state legislatures could recall Senators at any time and replace them with someone who had state interest in mind.
Well, the 17th Amendment did away with state legislatures electing, instead having the Senate elected via popular vote like the House. This single move is what has given rise to the loss of states' rights and the destruction of federalism/republicanism.
Until we repeal the 17th we will never have a constitutional federal government. It will only keep getting bigger and bigger.
This is where conservatives fucking fail. They have tunnel vision, not looking at the big picture. Meanwhile the Democrats are planning shit based on the big picture.
I would say yes, and in pretty short time, too. One or two election cycles and we'd see massive change - like 50% of the federal agencies/departments and laws/regulations gone. That's just a start.
The question then is how instead of when. If we know how then the when would be an eventuality. I guess it will be different for each state to get to that point, but to change the Amendment will require full control of both House, Senate, President, and 38(I think) States without a civil war.
I am the type that likes to go overboard. The fact that the Deep State is what it is is probably more reason why I stated it the way I did then the conventional way.
3/5 of the states is needed to do an amendment change, but I would like the 2/3 control of congress both house and senate just to ensure that Deep State has it that much harder to affect change. Having the president just furthers the Difficulty.
ELI5 please? Not a legalese junkie
the 17th amendment put senators to a popular vote rather than being chosen by state representatives.
in general, state representatives skew conservative because they have to come from all parts of the state, whereas the popular votes for a senator only come from the population centers of the state. in other words, all the "flyover counties" of states have no real say in who their senator is right now. the 17th amendment, in some sense, removed an electoral college for choosing senators.
if you repeal the 17th amendment, the end result is that all the rural county voters will have a larger say in who their senator is.
right now, in a state like montana, the relatively liberal cities like missoula and bozeman get to unilaterally pick who the senator is because they have a lot more retarded urbanites who vote for whomever the TV tells them to. but montana's state legislature will be conservative for a long time into the future.
I always wondered why Montana went full retard with governors
Well, that and all the fraud, of course. Who knows how many governorships they've taken by cheating?
We should also go to an electoral college for the Governors of our states.
The 17th was pushed by special interests who wanted to influence Senators but not be restricted by the will of state governments.
When our federal system was created, states were worried that the federal government would wield unrestricted power upon the them. Our Founders knew a House of Representatives could easily be influenced by the short-term whims of the people - who can easily be manipulated with propaganda. So, the states said "we don't want to lose our right to self govern if we join this new union." The solution was to create a Senate, where the Senators represented the interests of the states, and protected state sovereignty and states' rights. In addition, they didn't want the Senators to be elected by a popular vote, like the House, because a single Senator was easier to corrupt than 51% of a state legislature. Therefore, the Senators were to be elected by the state legislatures. The results was that Senators would NOT vote for bills that went against the interests of the states because those state legislatures could recall Senators at any time and replace them with someone who had state interest in mind.
Well, the 17th Amendment did away with state legislatures electing, instead having the Senate elected via popular vote like the House. This single move is what has given rise to the loss of states' rights and the destruction of federalism/republicanism.
Until we repeal the 17th we will never have a constitutional federal government. It will only keep getting bigger and bigger.
This is where conservatives fucking fail. They have tunnel vision, not looking at the big picture. Meanwhile the Democrats are planning shit based on the big picture.
So repeal the 17th and we go back to federalism
I would say yes, and in pretty short time, too. One or two election cycles and we'd see massive change - like 50% of the federal agencies/departments and laws/regulations gone. That's just a start.
The question then is how instead of when. If we know how then the when would be an eventuality. I guess it will be different for each state to get to that point, but to change the Amendment will require full control of both House, Senate, President, and 38(I think) States without a civil war.
I think that is the long term(at the moment)goal.
You don't need control of the Senate or House. You just need 3/5ths or 4/5ths of the states to pass an amendment.
I am the type that likes to go overboard. The fact that the Deep State is what it is is probably more reason why I stated it the way I did then the conventional way.
3/5 of the states is needed to do an amendment change, but I would like the 2/3 control of congress both house and senate just to ensure that Deep State has it that much harder to affect change. Having the president just furthers the Difficulty.