A 100-year Old Mistake Needs Correction! Now!

March 27, 2012

Tom Stark, Parkersburg, WV – The writings of our founders are plentiful, and clearly articulate their thinking and beliefs regarding our Constitution.  There was neither ambiguity in its intent nor lack of clarity in its wording.  It is difficult to comprehend the degree to which those words have been distorted and misinterpreted unless the purpose were to accomplish its undermining deliberately. 

The Prime Example:

 Alexander Hamilton, writing in Federalist No. 9, a portion of a series of newspaper editorials explaining the purpose, intent, meaning and thoughts behind the Constitution, said the following:

 “The proposed Constitution, so far from implying an abolition of the State governments, makes them constituent parts of the national sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign power. This fully corresponds, in every rational import of the terms, with the idea of a federal government.” (emphasis added)

“Federal” could be loosely interpreted as “Confederation of Cooperation and Mutual Support” meaning that it was intended to do only those things that were and are still impractical for the states to manage themselves as individual entities – defense, currency, etc.

 “…allowing them a direct representation in the Senate,”  was the single most important safeguard that was placed in the Constitution as a means of  limiting and controlling the powers of the federal government.  During the progressive assault on our country – not the current one, the first big one back around the time of  Woodrow Wilson – this safeguard was destroyed by the passage of the 17th Amendment which stopped the states from appointing Senators and made them subject to the whims of the public’s vote.   It sounded good at the time and still sounds good today, to some at least, because it makes people believe that it is better for them to have a say in their choice for Senator than to allow the state legislature the right to appoint them.  Unfortunately, many bought this fraud when, in reality, the real purpose in passing the amendment was to prevent states from resisting the authority and growing power of the federal government.

 Without the state legislature selecting the right people who answered only to that elected body and therefore was obligated to vote in the best interests of their individual state, those who advocated a strong and controlling central government were able to simply manipulate public opinion and bring pressure to bear on a popularly elected Senator to go along with what was being contemplated.

 It is most significant to note that the speed with which the power of our federal government began to gobble up power and control over the diminishing influence of state governments accelerated quickly and has been doing so fairly steadily since the passage of that ill-conceived 17th Amendment.  With few interruptions, this march to total control of the states and individuals byWashington,D.C. has continued unimpeded.

 Perhaps the next Congress will be better positioned philosophically to consider re-visiting this issue.  We can pray, can’t we?  

We must accept the fact that the backbone of the Constitution was seriously weakened by the passage of this Amendment and reverse the damage by repealing the 17th Amendment without delay.  In my humble opinion, that action could do more to check the power of the runaway federal government than any other two measures combined.

 Think about it carefully, then call your representatives.  The resistance will be fierce.  The struggle will be hard, but the end result will be the restoration of balance within the legislative branch of our government.



Powered by Facebook Comments

Tags: 17th Amendment, Congress, Direct Election of Senators, power, Senate, states rights, statism




Privacy Policy

Like Box

WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera