So, how crazy is the state Republican caucus in their sloppy embrace of their crazy, tenther, teabagger, state sovereignty agenda? So crazy that state Sen. Val Stevens has introduced a Joint Memorial calling for the repeal of the 17th Amendment… the amendment that mandates the direct popular election of U.S. Senators.
In its place, Stevens would have Senators once again appointed by their respective state legislators, only by a plurality vote, not a majority, thus giving Washington’s minority Republicans a better shot at electing a Senator than they do under our current, (small “d”) democratic system.
Really. I’m not kidding.
I guess that’s the Republican idea of “populism.”
Nice to see the Republican’s are working their tails off to fix the budget.
Did they legalize pot already? Because old Val must be smoking something. The plurality language is key here.
Currently 27 legislatures are controlled by Democrats, 8 by Republicans with 14 having split control. But if you look at the individual composition of the legislatures, Democrats have a substantial majority in overall representation with 4,062 members to 3,236 Republicans.
If the proposed amendment required a majority vote, the Republicans could very well make themselves an almost non-existent minority — at least if these ratios persist for a time. A plurality would greatly increase the chances of improving their position.
Disregarding party control and its anti-democratic bent, there could be an argument in favor of returning the election of senators to the state legislatures. Among other things, you wouldn’t have dinosaurs like Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd hanging around decades after they lose their capacity to make a meaningful contribution. There’s also a chance that we’d get more thoughtful and productive Senators, rather than retail politicians whose primary interests are fundraising and pandering. But I’m an optimist.
Btw, here is the link to the census site with the statistics on state legislature composition: http://www.census.gov/compendi.....tures.html
Why do Washington State Republicans hate democracy?
Wow! And wow that you are the only one covering this. Shouldn’t all of Washington understand that they are wasting tax payer resources this way?
@2
Just because I can’t resist pushing a couple of peoples buttons, I’d like to point out that one of those legislatures is actually non-partisan.
I think the Constitution should be amended, but not in the way Val suggests. I think Senate seats should be apportioned by population, just as House seats are, so that every citizen’s vote counts the same. There’s no justification for Alaska having as much clout in the Senate as California. That invites tyranny of the minority.
Of course, this “tentherist” stuff is nothing more than cheap grandstanding, because Stevens and the other R’s know it isn’t going anywhere.
Buried under the headlines about how a Republican minority in the Senate supported by a minority of the nation’s voters has succeeded in killing health reform desperately needed by tens of millions of honest hard-working Americans is the news that Johnson & Johnson, one of the world’s biggest drug companies, bribed nursing homes to shove schizophrenia pills down the throats of defenseless elderly patients.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34....._business/
Roger Rabbit Commentary: I think someone should be executed for this. Pow! Bullet to the head! That’s what China would do. Hey, just kidding, this is an Ann Coulter joke.
http://www.marlerblog.com/uplo....._squad.jpg
I mean, can you visualize Nurse Battleaxe prying open old Ollie’s mouth and pushing in a rubber hose and flushing that pill down his throat with a big water-filled syringe while aides pin Ollie’s arms behind his back in the windowless and soundproof Medication Administration Room?
It won’t be long before corporations are euthanizing the unemployed, disabled, and those too feeble to work anymore. Substitute a cyanide pill for the schizophrenia pill and we’re already there.
The positive side of this is that the Republican’s are behaving so out there and unhelpful in solving any of the problems we’re facing tha,t the Democrats would be crazy to try to include them in anything or to try and act in a bi-partisan manner.
Yes, just keep focusing on the right wing wingnuts, rather then pass some actual reform legislation. That is sure to bolster support for the Democratic Party.
Meanwhile, Republicans think we need to regulate trial lawyers instead of drug companies, insurance companies, and nursing homes. Why would anyone vote for them?
@11 Uhh, you may be overestimating the Democratic electeds.
212 Listen, nowadays a Democrat can be a hero just by blocking Republican suggestions.
There are days when I’m tempted to let the Republicans burn the country down. It doesn’t affect me very much. I’ve always got my hole and a park full of free grass.
Nope, it’s not the republican idea of populism, it’s to propose a go back what our founding fathers intended.
It was not to have a “willy nilly let’s rush things through because it’s Tuesday” body of legislature, but a mature group of thinkers, doing what’s best for the republic. And yes, the US is a republic, not a democracy….a slight, but important difference. Our founding fathers tried to avoid faction and fraction, the rise of the ill-educated, the less informed, the unpropertied classes that paid little or nothing in the way of taxes and therefore had little if any reason to vote. (like so many on this board here)
They tried to avoid people who could easily swayed by political appeals to the “heart” rather than to the “mind”. So before 1913, Senators were chosen by their various state legislatures, putting their election one step away from faction and fraction.
just a little historical perspective. :-)
Dutch @17, you have a dreamy view of history. Reality was that US Senate seats were regularly sold by corrupt state legislatures to the highest bidder. The ills of the current system can be corrected without re-enabling such overt corruption.
@17
Yer, funny. If you want to see the uneducated classes all you have to do is go to a tea bagger event.
aaww…poor goebbles/himmler rabbit is all depressed and stuff…..boohoo…..
@17
Don’t forget that by 1913 quite a few states had decided to appoint whomever the voters decided on. In other words quite a few states had direct election of Senators prior to passage of the 17th Amendment.
I mean if you want to get really technical about it the founders never really intended for the President to be effectively directly elected but for the electors to be selected by the legislatures of the several states and then to debate the issue amongst themselves.
Michael, I believe the state you are talking about having a non-partisan legislature is Nebraska, and a unicameral one at that. The COnstitutional Amendment was pushed by a New Deal Republican.
Chris Stefan
As for the legislature just picking who the voters chose for the Senate, might be seeing that happen in Canada. For the past few decades, Alberta has been holding Senate elections anyway, even though the Senate is appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the PM. Only twice have the voters choices in Alberta ever been picked by Ottawa.
Nice satire, Dutch. And don’t forget, many of our founders were Masons. We all know the fix was in from the beginning….well, at least those who really want to know :)
Chris Stefan, what I meant was, maybe the Progressive Conservatives at the time got the idea to have the election for Senators in Waiting from the past pre-1913 US examples. Upper House Parlimentary Reform seems to stall in many countries that try it, stalled by the very members that would lose power.
@17 “a mature group of thinkers”
Sounds great, but where is the GOP gonna get mature thinkers?
Personally, I think their proposal to repeal the 17th Amendment merely lays the groundwork for their ultimate objective, which is repealing the 13th Amendment.
@22
Yeah, I was pushing peoples buttons about NP stuff a few threads back.
roger rabbit, nice idea, I approvel plus that’s what is needed or else we are not a democracy and do not have equal rights !
But two problems.
l. too hard to change constitution, won’t ever happen.
2. methinks there is part of the constitution saying “however, there can be no amendment to make the senate represent people not states.”
Interesting legal situation, no? One clause in a constitution that is not amendable?
how can the past control the future with that dead hand lasting infinite years?
Maybe we should simply repeal government and go to a Mad Max society. Everyone arms themselves. Kill or be killed. Screw the social compact, it no longer exists. “One for all and all for one” is lunacy of the first degree. Yeah, I think I’m going to become a teabagger.
@29….awesome idea PL, I always wanted to get freaky with Tina Turner and be mayor of Bartertown….
Croak!
29. proud leftist spews:
Your arrogant, elitist musings is precisely what caused the slaughter in Mass. and what is becoming Obam-Mao and David “The Devil” Axelrod’s demise. Taunting and amking fun of average Americans really has helped Obam-Mao and Coakley.
Keep it up PL!!
I’ll pass your post on to all my non-Lunatic Democrat friends who still haven’t left the Democrat party! They HATE arrogance and elitism and are wise enough to take the Rea Party movement seriously.
You are lazy & stupid…perfect!
@29
At the least mob rule, the very thing Hamilton feared.
Cynical @ 32
You are that perfect toxic blend of a person who cannot be taken seriously, but who also lacks any sense of humor. There is also a rich irony in your calling me arrogant. You, who have no doubt about your righteousness, your wisdom, your correctness. Cynical, the perfect, pious patriot. And, everyone who thinks other than you is a “KLOWN.” I do find humor in your posts, Cynical, but I am quite aware you do not intend to be humorous.