>As for your contention that the 17th amendment is a violation of states' rights -- I once again suggest that you read the history books
Quite the contrary... you should read the history books.
The Founding Fathers carefully crafted the Constitution to not only divide power, but to see that Congressional elections and appointments were made through different methods. This is the key point:
The House was the only branch of power left open to the raw winds of democracy (mob rule).
The Senate was the preserve of the State Legislatures and was set up to preserve the sovereignty of the States.
The 17th amendment destroyed all that and gutted the checks and balances on government. Now the Senators are elected by the people, and, in actuality, are chosen by powerful national parties and their rich and powerful backers who influence and control popular opinion. Our Senate no longer represents the sovereign interests of the States and they really don't even represent the will of the people. They represent the powerful interests who got them elected. And, so, we have corruption of the highest order.
On the day the 17th was ratified by 36 of the 48 States, the U.S. ceased to become a federation of SOVEREIGN States and became merely a unitary state with minimally autonomous administrative provinces.
If you can't admit that the Seventeenth Amendment is an affront to States' rights, you are seriously in denial. There is a large movement (although you probably didn't know that) to repeal the 17th. Take Arizona's repeal action (never happened- not aware of why) for example and it'll explain it all for you...
HCR2024 - 422R - I Ver
Reference Title: seventeenth amendment; repeal
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
MAKING APPLICATION TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES TO REPEAL THE SEVENTEENTH AMENDMENT.
Whereas, the "Great Compromise" of the Constitutional Convention provided for proportional representation in the House of Representatives of the United States and equal representation for the states in the Senate of the United States; and
Whereas, the Founding Fathers determined that equal representation of the states in the Senate of the United States recognized the individual sovereignty of each state; and
Whereas, the Founding Fathers concluded that because the legislatures of the states were themselves "select bodies of men", the choice of United States Senators would generally be made "with peculiar care and judgment" by the legislatures themselves as originally provided for in Article I, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States; and
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment declared a division of authority between the states and the United States and was for the first 140 years invoked by the Supreme Court of the United States as a constitutional limit of congressional power as against the powers of the several states; and
Whereas, the election of the United States Senators by the state legislatures was the political mechanism against congressional encroachment into the sovereignty of the states; and
Whereas, one of the essential aspects of the states' exercise of this political mechanism is the United States Senate's advice and consent for treaties and appointments of executive and judicial officers made by the President of the United States; and
Whereas, the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913 changed the election of the United States Senators from the state legislatures to the popular vote of the people of the states, thereby divesting the states of any direct voice in the federal government; and
Whereas, due to the differing modes of representation and election in the House and Senate prior to 1913, each branch provided a balance of legislative power against, and an independent check upon, the other; and
Whereas, prior to 1913, history reveals that in choosing their Senators, the individual state legislatures supported the federal government, thereby providing harmony between the governments of the states and the government of the United States; and
Whereas, the Congress of the United States has, since the ratification of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments, steadily encroached upon the sovereignty of this and the other states united by and under the Constitution of the United States through the "general welfare" provision of the tax clause, the commerce clause and the indiscriminate use of unfunded mandates.
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring:
1. That the Legislature of the State of Arizona finds and declares to be defective the current process of electing United States Senators by the popular vote of the people.
2. That the Congress, in accordance with Article V of the Constitution of the United States, immediately propose and transmit to the several states for ratification an amendment to the Constitution repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.
3. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit certified copies of this Resolution to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each Member of the Arizona Congressional Delegation.
Lets look at an excerpt from the Denver Business Journal from March, 1997.
Do away with 17th Amendment
It's the best solution for campaign funding woes
With the ratification of the 17th Amendment, the Senate no longer represented the interests of the states, but rather those of their electorates. As a result, voters were less concerned about the qualifications of the members of their state legislatures. Instead, electing federal senators who would respond directly to their views became a major objective of the voters and their special interest groups.
Recent published reports estimate that a minimum of $20,000 per day must be raised by each senator during his or her six-year term of office to wage a competitive campaign for re-election. The recent Feinstein-Huffington campaign in California is a classic example of how expensive the quest for membership in what has been called "the world's most exclusive club" can be...
Senators elected by state legislatures would presumably be more responsive to their state's needs. As a result, U.S. senators would be better insulated from the almost daily pressures of voters' shifting interests, and, freed from constant fund -- raising chores, far better able to focus on the Nation's long -- term objectives. The Senate's constitutional role of being the nation's "saucer" in which the piping hot legislative broth drafted by the House is allowed to cool, will be restored. The sight of superannuated legislators with what appears to be almost lifelong tenure will be no more. It would be the rare legislature, indeed, that would re-elect a senator to term after term, especially with term limits for committee chairs...
This is not an original idea. This proposal was made and implemented by Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison and Adams, among others. It was successfully tested in the crucible of American politics for more than a century. It worked, and will work again.
So hopefully you're getting the point. I'm not just arguing this stuff because I feel like it.
It is the truth. You can deny it all you want, but it'll still be there. The truth will always win.
Check your 'facts'.