Issue 46 Should the U.S. get rid of the 17th Amendment April 2, 2013

For those who know the United States Constitution, the 17th Amendment allows the people to directly elect their Senators to the U.S. Senate. Originally, Senators were chosen by the State Legislatures with the Governor of the States making temporary appointments until the Legislature finalized its decision. However, the 17th Amendment is like its counterpart the 16th Amendment, a piece of progressive ideology when they sought a pure democracy as opposed to a democratic republic. They felt that by letting people choose for themselves, they would be able to impose the other democratic changes they sought to create their ideal democracy. Of course that would occur by mobilizing voters to elect their chosen candidates. For President Woodrow Wilson, a progressive Democrat, he wanted a democracy similar to that of Great Britain's and thus he supported the 17th.

Unintended Consequences: Under the 17th, the Senators were free of the traditional pressures of the State governments. But their constituencies provided the same form of pressure that the House of Representatives faces on a daily basis, the whims of the traditional voter. Senators would no longer counteract the House of Representatives with the peoples will (for good or bad) but instead, to maintain power, embrace the voting public's will and as a result sacrifice the States as power slowly shifted to Washington D.C. As a result, the individual States are often bullied by the Federal Government with the Feds only offering money if the States do something in return. But, that something in return often causes the States to want for more money. So what are the States to do as they don't want to raise taxes (though that will be the inevitable result), they beg for more money. This has become an endless cycle in America that has allowed for massive debt and very angry tax payers.

Under the old system: If the 17th did not exist, America would be very different. For one there would be no Federal welfare programs that overburdened the States, no Federal government forcing States to beg for more cash, and much less bureaucratic waste in the form of departments and agencies that infringe on States rights and privileges.

You are probably wondering, would it really be that different? Well yes as for one, it is one less (or should I say two less) political campaigns we have to vote on. No longer would we be forced to aid the political parties financially (yes our tax payer money is spent to support them too, unfortunately) to nominate Senators. So at least we would be lied to less. But, it also means that all the legislation that hurts States rights would slowly disappear. If a Senator did not obey the State Legislature, a Senator would be recalled to answer for it. It sometimes even meant the Senator would be fired and replaced, thus never seeing a second term in office, let alone finishing his first six year term. There of course was a safety net for when the State legislature could not decide on who should be Senator, and thus the Governors of each State had the power to appoint a temporary Senator. Historically speaking, a State always had its two Senators irrespective of how dead locked a Legislature was.

Conclusion: The Senate by proxy at the time represented the people by proxy as they were chosen by representatives of the people, but at the same time protected the State and Federal government from laws and programs that would bankrupt the American government. Today, we just have the President to act as a counter balance, but today even the President is subject to the whims of people thanks in part to the technology that allows the people to watch everything and anything he/she does. So unfortunately, I believe that America is slowly devolving into a democracy with the trappings of a Republic. What do I mean by this? What I mean is that without the counter balances America will develop into mob rule. How can I say this you ask? Simple, without a counter balance to counter the whims of the people and that of the government itself, it will sub come to pressures coming at it from all directions, including financially. Therefore, if we don't act America will cease to exist as we know it.  As such, to counteract our downward spiral, I think that as an option, we can be rid of the 17^th Amendment.