Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /home/coolgeek/freetag/freetag-0.240/adodb/drivers/adodb-mysql.inc.php on line 340
Honest Argument: The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution should be repealed.
join message

The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution should be repealed.

(Click boxes for full text or to add/edit/delete node. More help?)
The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution should be repealed.  The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution should be repealed.
       17th Amendment removes state governments' views from federal lawmaking.  17th Amendment removes state governments' views from federal lawmaking.
              Removes one of the balances designed into Congress  Removes one of the balances designed into Congress
              Has lead to increased centralization of power in Washington  Has lead to increased centralization of power in Washington
       17th Amendment makes all legislators directly accountable to the people  17th Amendment makes all legislators directly accountable to the people
              Leads to tyranny of the majority  Leads to tyranny of the majority
       Would make the Senate more vulnerable to state-level partisanship.  Would make the Senate more vulnerable to state-level partisanship.
              Would decrease national-level partisanship  Would decrease national-level partisanship
       Election by smaller group increases opportunity for corruption  Election by smaller group increases opportunity for corruption

Comments:




Re: node: The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution should be re

Quincy -

Good argument and good structure.

Could you add a little info in the Node Text regarding the purpose of the 17th amendment? The Short Node Text is just about perfect, but the drill-down is supposed to flesh out the node for people unfamiliar with the topic.

Thanks

Comment by: Ulysses Berman At: 2006-11-28 14:37:10



There were multiple practical problems with indirect election

I would add a refuting node to the root based on practical problems, support by the following two assertions:

1) Due to increasing partisanship and strife, many state legislatures failed to elect Senators for prolonged periods... forty-five deadlocks occurred in twenty states between 1891 and 1905, resulting in numerous delays in seating senators.

2) There were accusations of bribery, corruption and suspicious dealings in some elections... Nine bribery cases were brought before the Senate between 1866 and 1906.

It seems that these were the primary motivating factors in the original drive(s) for the 17th amendment

Both of these come from the Wikipedia page on the 17th Amendment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/...

Comment by: coolgeek At: 2006-11-28 22:18:47



Response to Ulysses Berman

Updated the thesis with some background info. See also coolgeek's comment below.



Comment by: Quincy At: 2006-11-29 00:12:14



Response to coolgeek

Split your one refuting node into two so each point could be debated independently. Each is a good counter argument and should spur some debate. Thanks.

Comment by: Quincy At: 2006-11-29 00:22:56



Re: node: Since each senator would be elected by a smaller numbe

It's far easier to corrupt the few rather than the many. Can anyone imagine the campaigning?

Comment by: Horofan At: 2006-11-29 08:23:40



Re: node: Making all legislators accountable to the people leads

Making certain legislators accountable only to state legislatures will lead to tyrrany of the privileged.

This isn't meant to be snarky, but it's a lot easier to exert control from a population size of say 300, than it is from a population size of 3 million.

Comment by: coolgeek At: 2006-12-01 19:34:22



Divided interests usually do not lead to tyranny

Making certain legislators accountable only to state legislatures will lead to tyrrany of the privileged.

coolgeek -

One could also argue that having one house in Congress accountable to state legislators would be an important check on power. Currently, both of our legislative bodies are accountable directly to the people, as is the President.

This imbalance of power had led to the concentration of power in Washington D.C. and loss of the balance of power between the federal and state governments. Considering the litany of illiberal laws that have been past in the foregoing 90 years, from Prohibition to price and wage controls to the War on Drugs to the PATRIOT Act, it's safe to say that this is not a favorable state of affairs.

Will node this out tomorrow morning.

Comment by: Quincy At: 2006-12-01 22:36:55



You are not signed in. You need to be registered to comment on this site. Sign in or create account (all you need is a valid email address)




Pending Arguments

There are no pending Arguments.

Create an Argument!