Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

Author Topic: I've had enough . . .  (Read 5765 times)

coelacanth

  • Senior Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 10040
  • eccentric orbit

  • Offline
I've had enough . . .
« on: September 29, 2018, 02:30:50 pm »
Repeal the 17th amendment to our Constitution.  Now.  No more of this bullsh*t. 
Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                               Benjamin Franklin

WeTheArmed.com

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    NukMed

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 422

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #1 on: September 29, 2018, 02:32:04 pm »
    Good start.  I can think of some others.
    Freedom trumps fear.  Rights trump security.  Free will trumps order.

    AltRight Vanguard

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 145
    • Forward, in the Name of God.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #2 on: September 29, 2018, 02:41:18 pm »
    Repeal the 17th amendment to our Constitution.  Now.  No more of this bullsh*t. 
    Had enough of Flakey Flake?  Lucky you, he's retiring. 

    God bless Lindsey Graham (who's she?) for telling it as it is.  One of the few times I have ever had respect for him, but he came through in a big way.
    West VirginiaLet these troubles come during my time, so that my children may live in peace.

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #3 on: September 29, 2018, 02:42:34 pm »
    Good start.  I can think of some others.

    Me too but this one has become completely and painfully obvious.   :facepalm
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #4 on: September 29, 2018, 02:43:54 pm »
    Had enough of Flakey Flake?  Lucky you, he's retiring. 

    God bless Lindsey Graham (who's she?) for telling it as it is.  One of the few times I have ever had respect for him, but he came through in a big way.
    I've had enough of that pompous jacka&& for years but at least he's dependable.   :banghead
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    AltRight Vanguard

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 145
    • Forward, in the Name of God.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #5 on: September 29, 2018, 02:44:19 pm »
    Good start.  I can think of some others.
    The 19th and 26th come to mind.
    West VirginiaLet these troubles come during my time, so that my children may live in peace.

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #6 on: September 29, 2018, 02:46:04 pm »
    True, but the 17th would be hard to argue persuasively against even in the senate.  Especially considering the disgusting toxic farce it has become of late.
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    AltRight Vanguard

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 145
    • Forward, in the Name of God.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #7 on: September 29, 2018, 02:48:30 pm »
    Then local gerrymandering would become a federal issue.   I would move to raise the voting age to mirror that of the age that one could hold the office.  So for the senate, no one would be eligible to vote for their senator until the age of 30 years.  For the president, 35.

    The local congressman would be an exception, with voting being possible at 21.
    West VirginiaLet these troubles come during my time, so that my children may live in peace.

    MTK20

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 8044
    • Mind of a philosopher, mouth of a sailor.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #8 on: September 29, 2018, 03:48:43 pm »
    :popcorn
    Texas
    Do we forget that cops were primarily still using 6 Shot Revolvers well through the mid 80's? It wasn't until after 1986 that most departments then relented and went to autos.
    Capacity wasn't really an issue then... and honestly really it's not even an issue now.
    Ray Chapman, used to say that the 125-grain Magnum load’s almost magical stopping power was the only reason to load .357 instead of .38 Special +P ammunition into a fighting revolver chambered for the Magnum round. I agree. - Massad Ayoob

    Paradoxically it is those who strive for self-reliance, who remain vigilant and ready to help others.

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #9 on: September 29, 2018, 04:13:12 pm »
    Then local gerrymandering would become a federal issue.   I would move to raise the voting age to mirror that of the age that one could hold the office.  So for the senate, no one would be eligible to vote for their senator until the age of 30 years.  For the president, 35.

    The local congressman would be an exception, with voting being possible at 21.
    Gerrymandering is already an issue and has been since the term was coined over 200 years ago so that isn't a new problem. It is almost always decided in federal court in any event.  Repealing the 17th amendment wouldn't directly affect it in any way except to make the senate a body more reflective of the majority of states' political make-up similar to the Electoral College.  Repealing the 17th would be fought viciously by the same crowd that would try to ban the Electoral College and for the same reasons.  Popular election strategies - translation: mob rule - are invariably intended to concentrate power in the major population centers and reduce it for the unwashed, uneducated, undesirables in those awful, smelly, rural states and districts. 

    Age limits would be tested on constitutional grounds and would get drug through the courts interminably.  I could get on board with it but I think repealing the 17th is the linchpin to getting the the cesspit pumped out in Washington.  What better time to broach the subject than when 90%+ of the voting population is thoroughly disgusted with the senate as it is currently?   :coffee

    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    Plebian

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2604

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #10 on: September 29, 2018, 05:21:52 pm »
    Send the choosing of senators back to State legislatures? I assume this is the thought process. 
    Oklahoma"If all our problems are solved, we'll find new ones to replace them. If we can't find new ones, we'll make new ones."

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #11 on: September 29, 2018, 05:43:46 pm »
    Yes.  This would revert back to the original selection process set forth in the Constitution.
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    AltRight Vanguard

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 145
    • Forward, in the Name of God.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #12 on: September 29, 2018, 06:51:59 pm »
    Age limits would require the same change to the constitution that repealing the 17th would.  Might as well knock them out together.
    West VirginiaLet these troubles come during my time, so that my children may live in peace.

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #13 on: September 29, 2018, 06:55:08 pm »
    I think age limits would likely face a constitutional challenge but repealing the 17th probably would not.  If I have to take them both to get it done I'm OK with that.
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    AltRight Vanguard

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 145
    • Forward, in the Name of God.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #14 on: September 29, 2018, 07:32:24 pm »
    I think age limits would likely face a constitutional challenge but repealing the 17th probably would not.  If I have to take them both to get it done I'm OK with that.
    How could changing the constitution face a constitutional challenge?  You are changing it.  Right now, our senators are selected by direct election, and 18 year olds can vote.  They are both amendments to the constitution, and thus equal parts of it.  To change either would require the same process as repealing the second amendment.
    West VirginiaLet these troubles come during my time, so that my children may live in peace.

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #15 on: September 29, 2018, 07:37:07 pm »
    Except that repealing the 17th amendment would not face a credible 14th amendment challenge as would any repeal of current age limits.  Bear in mind, I'm not a constitutional scholar and I don't play one on the internet but that's the way it seems to me.  Hell, I'm good with the Bill of Rights as it was originally written and everything that should be against the law was already against the law by about 1912 so if we're going to hit the reset button let's go for it.   :cool
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    AltRight Vanguard

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 145
    • Forward, in the Name of God.

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #16 on: September 29, 2018, 08:38:03 pm »
    Well maybe the 14th is one of those amendments that needs revised... 


    Regardless, a properly passed amendment that specifies a certain voting age, could only be considered a clarification or an overwrite of prior amendments.  It would not be in conflict, because it could not be.
    West VirginiaLet these troubles come during my time, so that my children may live in peace.

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #17 on: September 29, 2018, 08:45:56 pm »
    I was hashing this out with a friend and he is definitely more talented and knowledgeable than I on things of this nature and his opinion is that the current fairly broad interpretation of the 14th amendment makes it the starting point for challenging anything that grants a right to one group of citizens ( of the age of majority )that it restricts for another.  Much like the "Interstate Commerce" clause in the Constitution has been too broadly interpreted by modern jurists.  I think he may be right on this point. 

    As I said - for me?  Hit the reset button and let 'er rip.   :coffee
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    aikorob

    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1365

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #18 on: September 30, 2018, 06:51:09 am »
    if you are going to tackle age limits, throw in that ALL age limits mirror the amendment:

    voting
    firearms
    entering contracts
    alcohol
    marriage
    etc.
    GeorgiaFrom The Codex Kalachnikova: "He who would have you surrender your arms does so because he wishes to do something you could prevent by their usage."

    RMc

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2209

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #19 on: September 30, 2018, 07:19:09 am »
    If you recall the "Great Compromise" from high school American History, one aspect was conveniently omitted.  The Senate was supposed to represent the interests of state governments. The House of Representatives was the "people's house." This concept was also the precise reason that all money bills had to orignate in the directly elected House of Representatives.

    So what was the underlying reason for direct election of senators?  Simply put, the 17th Amendment wrote any representation of the legal entity of state goverment of the Constitution.  It thus ended any direct influence state governments had over the Federal Government. It is not often said, but the 17th Amendment also arguably kicked a leg out from under the Great Compromise.

    As I see it, the 17th Amendment essentially replaced the Senate with another "House of Representatives."  Yes, I believe a cogent argument can be made that today the United States has two "House(s) of Representatives" with the only real difference being the size of the districts represented!

    Bottom line, the 17th Amendment effectively wrote the voice of state governments out of the legislative branch of the Federal Government. 
    The 17th Amend. thus eliminated one of the unheralded "checks and balances" built into the our system of government.                         
    « Last Edit: September 30, 2018, 07:34:30 am by RMc »
    Alabama

    kunkmiester

    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 774
    • The Purple One

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #20 on: September 30, 2018, 08:46:26 am »
    Don't forget the ostensible reason for the amendment wasbdeadlocked state legislatures leaving seats open for years.  You'll have to deal with this too somehow.
    WashingtonEvil is Evil, no matter how small

    Langenator

    • WTA LEO
    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1888

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #21 on: September 30, 2018, 09:24:58 am »
    It wouldn't effect anything at the Federal level, but Baker v. Carr is one SCOTUS decision I'd love to see overturned, or overridden by Congress.

    Baker v. Carr basically said that state governments had to base the electoral districts of both houses of their legislatures on population, instead of basing one on geographically defined districts (often counties, or a set number of counties).  This put in motion the complete domination of many state legislatures (CA, IL, NY, most notably) by their urban areas.
    TexasFortuna Fortis Paratus

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #22 on: September 30, 2018, 03:51:55 pm »
    It wouldn't effect anything at the Federal level, but Baker v. Carr is one SCOTUS decision I'd love to see overturned, or overridden by Congress.

    Baker v. Carr basically said that state governments had to base the electoral districts of both houses of their legislatures on population, instead of basing one on geographically defined districts (often counties, or a set number of counties).  This put in motion the complete domination of many state legislatures (CA, IL, NY, most notably) by their urban areas.
    Correct.  That one is clearly a product of the thinking that gave us the 17th to begin with.   

    Don't forget the ostensible reason for the amendment wasbdeadlocked state legislatures leaving seats open for years.  You'll have to deal with this too somehow.
    Correct.  However, that problem occurred in a time frame over a century ago and even back then not everybody thought it was necessarily a bad thing like the backers of the 17th amendment made it out to be.   Its hard to imagine a replay of that same phenomenon today.   :hmm

    In many states a senator who either dies in office or is unable to serve the term for some other reason is replaced by someone chosen by the state's governor.  A modification of that statutory power could allow a sitting governor to fill a seat left vacant by a recalcitrant legislature.  At any rate, however each state decides to fill that vacancy should be up to the people of that state.  I think they would realize pretty quickly that in today's environment a vacant seat ( or even two .  .  .   :facepalm ) is not in anybody's interest. 
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    Langenator

    • WTA LEO
    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1888

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #23 on: September 30, 2018, 04:24:13 pm »
    Correct.  That one is clearly a product of the thinking that gave us the 17th to begin with.     

    It would have been an interesting, and actually substantive, question for a member of the Senate Judiciary committee to ask a SCOTUS nominee:

    "Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution reads, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government."  How do you interpret this?"
    TexasFortuna Fortis Paratus

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: I've had enough . . .
    « Reply #24 on: September 30, 2018, 04:30:42 pm »
    Except that no member of the committee would ask such a question if they didn't already know the answer they would receive.  I agree that it would be interesting to hear the justices or potential justices opine on this but I don't imagine any of them would be too keen on doing it in a public forum. 
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.