Notes on the 17th Amendment - Granite Grok

Notes on the 17th Amendment

The 17th Amendment – the one that shifted the election of Senators from the State Legislators (a key part of holding the power of Federal Government in check vis-a-vis that of the States) was flogged by Progressives at the turn of the last century as being "anti-cronyism".  Why shouldn’t the public vote on Senators?

Much to the delight of Progressives, it passed – IMHO, it set the stage to vastly increase the power of the Federal government.  Why?  The "power governor" (like the speed governor in a car) that kept the States in the game that put the States’ rights and interests first was gone (watch the videos here and here from a 912er).  Obamacare – would it have passed?    Boortz has more thoughts (and a recap of the NH CD-1 Candidates thoughts after the jump):

Can you imagine how our own battle with illegal immigration might be different if the Senators still represented state governments? Illegals cost state governments tens of billions of dollars. The children of illegals have to be educated and their emergency medical needs must be tended to. Then there is the crime costs associated with illegals. Here are just a few estimates of the cost of illegal immigration to some individual states:

    * Florida: At least $2 billion a year.
    * California: Over $10 billion a year.
    * Kansas: (yes … Kansas) $442 million a year.

And then there’s Arizona … the cost there is over $1.3 billion a year. Arizona tries to do something to solve the problem. It’s clear that the federal government will do nothing to control illegal immigration so long as The Community Organizer is in office … so the Arizona legislature steps up. As soon as Arizona passes its law many other states reveal plans to do the same. The Obama steps up and orders the Justice Department to file a lawsuit against Arizona … to sue Arizona for its attempt to enforce laws that the federal government refuses to support. How might this have all been different if Arizona, New Mexico and all of the other states considering passing laws to stem the invasion of illegals had official representation in Washington in the person of two Senators each?

Then there’s the issue of unfunded mandates. Medicaid…

would be the prime example here. There can’t be a state in our nation that isn’t wrestling with the federally-mandated costs of dealing with Medicaid. How do you think this situation might change if senators representing the states, and not the Medicaid beneficiaries, had a voice in policy?

So .. the Democrats want to use a Republican threat of repealing the 17th Amendment to frighten voters? This, if it is in fact true, should be seen as a positive … not a negative. It’s time to strengthen state governments at the expense of federal power.

I agree – given the excesses of the last century, can we rely solely on our national leaders?  I think not – and I also think that given this, we need this protection back for our Republic.

Oh, here’s what the NH CD-1 candidates have to say:

    

Frank Guinta    Rich Ashooh

   

Bob Bestani  Sean Mahoney

>