Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Roosevans’ “Should the 17th Amendment be repealed?”

HT: Mike P from Repeal the 17th Amendment Discussion Board

“Should the 17th Amendment be repealed?”

Repeal of the amendment would restore both federalism and bicameralism. It would also have a dramatic and positive effect on campaign spending. Senate races are currently among the most expensive. But if state legislatures were the focus of campaigns, more candidates might get more access with less money — decidedly a good thing.

Returning selection of senators to state legislatures might be a cause that could attract both modern progressive and conservatives. For conservatives, obviously, it would be a return to the system envisioned by the framers. For progressives — who now must appreciate that direct elections have only enhanced the ability of special interests to influence the process — returning to the diffusion of power inherent in federalism and bicameralism may seem an attractive alternative, or complement, to campaign finance reform.

Comment: Certainly some vary applicable points. I would also point out that campaign finance reform originated in the US Senate. Was it meant to reform or sustain? I say it was meant to sustain the power the elected have garnered at our expense.

No comments: