One of the clearest measures of anti-Washington feeling this election year is the attack on a little-remembered, century-old amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Republican candidates in more than a half-dozen states have called for the repeal of the 17th Amendment, which was ratified in 1913 and which provides for the direct election of U.S. senators. Prior to the amendment, senators were designated by state legislatures.
"People would be better off if senators, when they deliver their messages to Washington, remember the sovereignty of the states," Mike Lee, who supports repeal, told reporters recently. Mr. Lee is a Republican running for the U.S. Senate from Utah.
Proponents of repeal say the amendment wrecked the founding fathers' balance between national and state governments, removing one of the last checks to unbridled power in Washington. Opponents counter that direct election of senators, long a goal of the Progressive movement of that era, expanded democracy.
The idea of repealing the 17th Amendment has bounced around conservative and libertarian circles for years, but is enjoying a resurgence this year thanks to the rise of tea-party candidates, who often embrace a strict view of the Constitution. It coincides with a broader attack on Progressive-era changes, notably the 16th Amendment, which created the income tax, and taps into the belief that big government began in the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
Read the rest of the WSJ article here.
Comment: Unfortunately, this isn't a very good article and lacks any depth, especially from the supposed "constitutional" expert, who I wonder if she had ever read the Federalist Papers. Clearly her understanding about Madison is lacking.
This also demonstrates where the WSJ sits on the issue, and clearly that is with continuing statism rather than restoration of limited government. But there was one positive point found in the article, which you won't find in other MSM outlet hit pieces on the 17th movement, and that was the connection and mention of 16th Amendment. The linkage is important and this writer made the connection.
1 comment:
The Wall Street Journal, like the Washington Post and The Huffington Post, have a vested interest to keep the established power base in the Senate and will do everything it can to prevent a reinstallation of the states place in the Senate. While the degrees of separation between the WSJ and HP may be projected to be great, the reality is they are a hairs width apart, as is 99 percent of the MSM. All are in favor of big government, corporatism, welfare, war, internationalism, consumerism, and materialism. All see the vast majority of Americans as uncouth and able to think accordingly. So it’s not surprising to see the WSJ come out against a repeal of the 17th. Nevertheless we on the libertarian right need to understand one important fact, the MSM, no matter if it is the WSJ or FOXNews, will not support any real effort to restore limited government in this country.
Post a Comment