17th Amendment repeal going over like a lead balloon

[EriktheRed]

Looks like this is one issue the Tea Party crowd is definitely not gonna get much support on....

There are signs that tea party calls to repeal the 17th Amendment -- taking the selection of U.S. Senators out of the hands of voters and putting it in the hands of state governments -- are proving to be a bridge too far for Republican candidates desperate to steal some of the movement's mojo. In the past couple weeks, at least two mainstream Republican candidates have found themselves walking back from pledges to support repealing the amendment, suggesting there's a limit to how much support the tea parties can provide.

The "Repeal The 17th" movement is a vocal part of the overall tea party structure. Supporters of the plan say that ending the public vote for Senators would give the states more power to protect their own interests in Washington (and of course, give all of us "more liberty" in the process.) As their process of "vetting" candidates, some tea party groups have required candidates to weigh in on the idea of repeal in questionnaires. And that's where the trouble starts.

Read the rest here.

 

[Oddball]

Looks like party men being party men before anything else.

Nothing new here.

 

[Luissa]

I really don't get this one.

 

[Nate]

"I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators," Ward told the Spokesman-Review newspaper. "What I do support is amending the Constitution and adding a two-term limit for U.S. senators."

Tea Party-Backed Repeal Of The 17th Amendment Gets Republicans Into Trouble | TPMDC

Totally 100% agree with this!!! Amend the amendment! The longer a senator has that seat the more he/she loses touch with their constituants!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

"I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators," Ward told the Spokesman-Review newspaper. "What I do support is amending the Constitution and adding a two-term limit for U.S. senators."

Tea Party-Backed Repeal Of The 17th Amendment Gets Republicans Into Trouble | TPMDC

Totally 100% agree with this!!! Amend the amendment! The longer a senator has that seat the more he/she loses touch with their constituants!

No, I'd rather not have the government take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

You want term limits? Vote.

 

[Luissa]

"I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators," Ward told the Spokesman-Review newspaper. "What I do support is amending the Constitution and adding a two-term limit for U.S. senators."

Tea Party-Backed Repeal Of The 17th Amendment Gets Republicans Into Trouble | TPMDC

Totally 100% agree with this!!! Amend the amendment! The longer a senator has that seat the more he/she loses touch with their constituants!

I found this from the local new station website, which is owned by the Spokesman Review.

Ward borrows statements from other Republicans - KHQ Right Now - News and Weather for Spokane and North Idaho |

Position statements appearing on U.S. House hopeful Vaughn Ward's website appear to have been cut and pasted from other Republican lawmakers' websites and writings.

After The Spokesman-Review cited wording on Ward's website and compared it with original sources, links on Ward's website were disabled within half an hour.

 

[Avatar4321]

There is a movement now? Sounds good. I'm all for it.

The key to preserving our Republic is to restore the Checks and Balances to keep them from imposing themselves onto the populace.

 

[Nate]

"I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators," Ward told the Spokesman-Review newspaper. "What I do support is amending the Constitution and adding a two-term limit for U.S. senators."

Tea Party-Backed Repeal Of The 17th Amendment Gets Republicans Into Trouble | TPMDC

Totally 100% agree with this!!! Amend the amendment! The longer a senator has that seat the more he/she loses touch with their constituants!

No, I'd rather not have the government take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

You want term limits? Vote.

How did you get that I wanted the gov. to take away my right to vote with what i posted!?! The Rep. I quoted said the EXACT same thing, "I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators,". Might be a little early for drinking partner.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Tea Party-Backed Repeal Of The 17th Amendment Gets Republicans Into Trouble | TPMDC

Totally 100% agree with this!!! Amend the amendment! The longer a senator has that seat the more he/she loses touch with their constituants!

No, I'd rather not have the government take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

You want term limits? Vote.

How did you get that I wanted the gov. to take away my right to vote with what i posted!?! The Rep. I quoted said the EXACT same thing, "I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators,". Might be a little early for drinking partner.

Term limits = taking away my right to vote for who I want.

That simple enough for you?

 

[Nate]

No, I'd rather not have the government take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

You want term limits? Vote.

How did you get that I wanted the gov. to take away my right to vote with what i posted!?! The Rep. I quoted said the EXACT same thing, "I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators,". Might be a little early for drinking partner.

Term limits = taking away my right to vote for who I want.

That simple enough for you?

Ah ok, you have made it pretty simple. You have no problems voting for a person who doesn't have your best interest in mind. Perfect example is how this autrocity of a Health Care Bill passed with the republicans trading their votes(behind closed doors) for whatever they wanted.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

How did you get that I wanted the gov. to take away my right to vote with what i posted!?! The Rep. I quoted said the EXACT same thing, "I do not want to take away the power of people to elect senators,". Might be a little early for drinking partner.

Term limits = taking away my right to vote for who I want.

That simple enough for you?

Ah ok, you have made it pretty simple. You have no problems voting for a person who doesn't have your best interest in mind. Perfect example is how this autrocity of a Health Care Bill passed with the republicans trading their votes(behind closed doors) for whatever they wanted.

No, that's not what I said.

I said that I don't want the government to take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

 

[Dr Gregg]

trade for the 2nd amendment?

 

[Oddball]

I really don't get this one.

It has to do with dual sovereignty and diffusion of power.

When the Senators were appointed by the state legislatures, they were beholden to them insofar as spending policy was concerned...Back then, direct federal taxes were apportioned to and collected by state agencies.

Since the passage of the 17th Amendment, no state legislature has had any say in federal budgets and spending.

 

[Avatar4321]

trade for the 2nd amendment?

Deal. We take the Second Amendment, you can have the 17th.

 

[Avatar4321]

I really don't get this one.

It has to do with dual sovereignty and diffusion of power.

When the Senators were appointed by the state legislatures, they were beholden to them insofar as spending policy was concerned...Back then, direct federal taxes were apportioned to and collected by state agencies.

Since the passage of the 17th Amendment, no state legislature has had any say in federal budgets and spending.

Nor have they had much of a check on the Federal Government at all.

The one check they still do have is taking them to court. But we all know how often that happens, and it requires the Federal Government to find in their favor. We all know how often that happens.

 

[Nate]

Term limits = taking away my right to vote for who I want.

That simple enough for you?

Ah ok, you have made it pretty simple. You have no problems voting for a person who doesn't have your best interest in mind. Perfect example is how this autrocity of a Health Care Bill passed with the republicans trading their votes(behind closed doors) for whatever they wanted.

No, that's not what I said.

I said that I don't want the government to take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

So do you feel that the person you have continuously voted for to represent you and your neighbors has had your best interest in mind? Honest question, if answered "yes" I'll leave it alone.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Ah ok, you have made it pretty simple. You have no problems voting for a person who doesn't have your best interest in mind. Perfect example is how this autrocity of a Health Care Bill passed with the republicans trading their votes(behind closed doors) for whatever they wanted.

No, that's not what I said.

I said that I don't want the government to take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

So do you feel that the person you have continuously voted for to represent you and your neighbors has had your best interest in mind? Honest question, if answered "yes" I'll leave it alone.

I don't oppose term limits because I love my rep. I oppose term limits on principle.

But my Senator is a friend of mine, so yes, I will keep voting for him.

 

[Nate]

No, that's not what I said.

I said that I don't want the government to take away my right to vote for whoever I want.

So do you feel that the person you have continuously voted for to represent you and your neighbors has had your best interest in mind? Honest question, if answered "yes" I'll leave it alone.

I don't oppose term limits because I love my rep. I oppose term limits on principle.

But my Senator is a friend of mine, so yes, I will keep voting for him.

More power to you then Doc. No point arguing with someone set in their ways.