Repeal the 17th amendment

Dear editor:

There are many causes that explain how the federal government's footprint grew so big in the states. One of them is the 17th Amendment; it substantively changed how U.S. senators are selected and decreased their accountability to the states.

The argument in favor of the 17th Amendment was to curb corruption. The concerns of the time were real, but the "remedy" has given us side effects far more serious than the problem the Amendment was purported to remedy.

Originally, our Congress was made of The House of Representatives -- a body elected by The People, and the Senate, a body of "statesmen" selected by the states' legislatures, not by popular vote.

Sadly, the 17th Amendment made Congress more "democratic;" precisely what the founding fathers feared and warned against. The 17th Amendment damaged our Republic. It removed an effective safeguard and subjected us to worse (democratic) corruption than existed before by allowing the power of money to substitute statesmen with politicians. While not perfect, statesmen were more inclined to act jealously over state sovereignty, compared to the politicians that replaced them who are happy to sell your freedom.

The 17th Amendment did not prevent corruption in Illinois. It did not stop Gov. Blagojevich from selling Obama's U.S. Senate seat. Furthermore, it allowed Hillary Clinton to be launched by special interest money into a U.S. Senate seat vacancy in New York -- a place she has no roots. Nonetheless, she was strategically positioned there to advance her party's national agenda and her own ambitions.

Had the 17th Amendment not been ratified, polarizing issues that have become constitutional crises like abortion or healthcare would have remained for the several states to decide or ignore respectively. Candidates for U.S. Senate like Hillary could not be recruited, funded and then planted strategically like pieces on a chess board to force transformational issues to the national stage for a corrupt Congress and a stacked Supreme Court (made of members confirmed by -- you guessed it: the US Senate) to settle.

Restoring the process the founders gave us in Article I, Section III of the U.S. Constitution would return to The People sovereign power through their states' legislatures to appoint U.S. senators. Senators who fail to oppose federal legislation that infringe on states' powers and individual liberty could be recalled. There would be a price to pay for putting federal agendas over states' interests.

Repealing the 17th Amendment would go a long way toward restoring the proper (intended) balance of power in our Republic known as "dual sovereignty" where each part -- federal and state -- is sometimes superior and sometimes subordinate to the other.

Perhaps "Governor" Fulcher would champion that cause during his first National Governors' Conference.

-- Doug Traubel