Machiavelli said, “It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.” A prescient and oft repeated quote that is pertinent to the situation.
When our founders created the system of government for our constitutional republic, they built in layers of protection from federal control over the lives of people in the states. Over time those protections have been eroded as the federal bureaucracy has seized power. One of the biggest changes that led to the creation of the permanent political class was the 17th amendment.
Our founders created a system where Senators were appointed by the state legislatures. In this original system the senate was bound by obligation to look out for the best interests of their specific states. Under the ‘advise and consent‘ rules of Senate confirmation for executive branch appointments, the intent was to ensure the presidential appointee -who would now carry out regulatory activity- would not undermine the independent position of the states.
The nucleus of corruption amid every element of the federal institutions of government is the United States Senate. The U.S. Senate, also known as the “upper chamber,” is the single most powerful elected element in modern federal government.
The Intelligence Branch is the most powerful branch of government. However, the U.S. Senate is the most powerful assembly of federally elected officials. We pretend the IC branch doesn’t exist; that’s part of our problem. At least we admit the Senate exists.
All other elected federal corruption is dependent on a corrupt and ineffective Senate. If we correct the problems with the Senate and reconnect the representation within the chamber to the state-level legislative bodies, we will then see immediate change. However, there would be ZERO institutional allies in this effort.
When the 17th amendment (direct voting for Senators) took the place of state appointments, the perspective of ‘advise and consent’ changed. The senate was now in the position of ensuring the presidential appointee did not undermine the power of the permanent bureaucracy, which is the root of power for the upper-chamber.
Senate committees, Homeland Security, Judiciary, Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Relations, etc. now consists of members who carry an imbalanced level of power within government. The senate now controls who will be in charge of executive branch agencies like the DOJ, DHS, FBI, CIA, ODNI, DoD, State Dept and NSA, from the position of their own power and control in Washington DC.
In essence, the 17th amendment flipped the intent of the constitution from protecting the individual states to protecting the federal government.
Almost every source of federal issue: ex. spending, intervention and foreign assistance, conflict with the states, burdensome regulation, surveillance and spying on American citizens, the two-tiered justice system and the erosion of liberty & individual rights (see COVID examples), can be sourced back to the problem created by the 17th amendment.
Because of the scale of their power, the Senate will not give up control easily; and every institution of society and government will actively work to block/stop We The People from taking back control of the upper chamber. Every entity from Wall Street to multinational corporations, big tech, banks, foreign governments and world organizations would align against us. When you truly understand the epicenter of the corruption, then you are able to see the tentacles extending from it.
It would be easy to say “repeal the 17th amendment;“ it is ‘another kettle of fish’ entirely to walk through the process to make that happen. Yes, ultimately, we do need a full repeal of the 17th amendment and return the selection of the senators from each state with a nomination and appointment process within the state legislature. [Common Explainer Here]
Seventeenth Amendment- “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.” (link)
Prior to the 17th amendment, there was significant state level corruption as business interests and senate candidates worked in power groups with party officials to attain the position. Politicians seeking Senate seats began campaigning for state legislative candidates in order to assemble support.
The state legislative races then became a process of influence amid powerful interests seeking to support their Senate candidate. Get the right people in the State legislature and you can get the Senator appointed.
Those state-level entities, bankers, wealthy people of influence, later became the permanent K-Street lobbying groups once the 17th amendment was ratified. In essence, they just shifted the location of their influence operation from the state to an office in Washington DC. [Those same power groups, albeit much larger, now write the physical legislation we see in congress.] Additionally, prior to the 17th amendment, there were issues of vacancies in federal senate seats as state legislatures could not agree on an individual Senator.
The biggest issue following the passage of the 17th amendment became Senators who were no longer representing the interests of their state. Instead, they were representing the interests of the power elite groups who were helping them fund the mechanisms of their re-election efforts.
A Senator only needs to run for re-election every six years. The 17th amendment is the only amendment that changed the structure of the congress as it was written by the founders.
Over time, the Senate chamber itself began using their advice and consent authority to control the executive and judicial branch. The origination of a nomination now holds the question: “Can this person pass the Senate confirmation process?” The Senate now abuses this power to ensure no one challenges them. Additionally, the Senate began using their oversight capacity to control elements within the executive branch and judicial branch. The full scope of that issue in modern form is OUTLINED HERE – which is the cornerstone of the Intelligence Branch of Government.
If we can repeal the 17th amendment and return the selection to the state legislature, you can see where the background work of Tactical Civics and Extreme Federalism begin to take on importance. [NOTE: Within the repeal effort we would need to include a recall process for states to reach out and yank back their Senator if they go astray; the ability to recall was missing in the original construct of the framers; it would need to be added.]
◊ PATH ONE is the primary platform of the presidential candidate…. a visible and emphasized mandate that includes: “vote me into office and you are voting to repeal the 17th amendment “. This specific election issue would need to be the #1 priority of the candidate and spoken at every event.
This approach gives presidential candidate Donald Trump the mandate to demand congress to act if he won the 2024 election. We need a warrior of epic strength, resolve and fortitude. We need Donald Trump.
◊ PATH TWO is the parallel path built along with the 2024 election platform path and put into place in the event that Congress refused to accept the mandate.
Obviously, this would be an ugly battle. The second path is a convention of states in the first year of President Trump’s second term in office.
The ‘convention of states‘ would be detailed, strategically planned, and the future schedule determined during the 2024 GOP convention preceding the November election (assuming the right candidate wins). That way, if congress refuses to act on their own, within say the first 100 days of the new administration, the state legislatures will then assemble a convention for the singular and limited purpose of one action item: “repeal the 17th amendment “. That’s it. Full Stop. Nothing more. Nothing else entertained.
There is a lot more to this, and a lot more to cover in discussion of this. However, this is the path that can resolve most of the issues we face with an out-of-control federal government. The shift in power would kneecap the Intelligence Branch of Government by re-instituting genuine oversight and control. A repeal of the 17th amendment stops Senators from campaigning, needing to raise money and puts them directly into the accountability position as a steward for the interests of their state.
The people within each state would then have a mechanism to address any negative federal action by contacting their state legislative representative. In a worst-case scenario, a rogue Senator could be removed within days if they support any federal legislative activity that is not in alignment with the state interest. This approach also wipes out most of the power amid the Senate Majority Leader, as he/she could also be recalled by the state and would be less likely to work against the interests of the majority in the chamber.
The House of Representatives was created to be the voice of the people, ie, “The Peoples’ House.” However, the U.S. Senate was structurally created to be the place where state government had representation in the federal government decision-making. The 17th amendment completely removed state representation, and we have been in an escalating battle over state’s rights ever since.
Overlay that DC structural issue with the fact that almost all of the bureaucracy created by this skewed DC system is now in place to defend itself from any outside effort to change it, and you get this UniParty problem that Donald Trump fully exposed.
Repeal the 17th amendment and we would see the most significant restoration of freedom, liberty and social balance in our lifetime.
100% agree.
The 17th amendment undermined the balance of power and check against federal power.
Much like the evisceration of rural and small town America as a check against the big cities caused by the Reynolds v. Simms Supreme Court case (Democrat majority), and like the push to eliminate the electoral college, these efforts are all to empower control of the entire nation by elitists in big cities where the Democrats are typically a political monopoly.
100% agree with you 100% agreeing.
Such a tough battle though, and likely too esoteric for most voters to comprehend as a campaign priority.
Well, a little schooling is needed then
A: I think you underestimate the ability of regular citizens to recognize problems and reach reasonable conclusions as to how to proceed. Given a clear and rational explanation of the issue, most common-sense folks in this country would agree with this article.
The push to eliminate the electoral college is extremely worrisome and must not be ignored – it relies on ignorant citizens being swayed by the demagoguery of those who are trying to eliminate it.
Several amendments have passed that in my view succeeded due to such demagoguery and ignorance.
I don’t know why people are so afraid of an Article 5 Convention. It was put into the Constitution for a reason by our Founders. Let’s use it to repeal the 17th, and like Sundance mentioned, only to repeal the 17th nothing else.
I know Levin has pushed this for years, but can it truly be limited to just the 17th?
No! The Bolsheviks will pack the Supreme Court and restrict the 1st and 2nd Amendment while requiring free legal representation in immigration proceedings!
Most likely.
We are fearful of a Convention because the evil Dems are always 2 steps ahead of the lazy simpletons that are Republicans. An open Convention could be the end of the Republic. Tread carefully on that one.
But anyone can see that Senators (Romney, Schummer, McTurtle for ex.) could give 2 figs about their states. They are now little Potentates..wielding power over their kingdoms….and often fighting to be the next President.
Yes repeal the 17th. The Founders knew best.
In regards to the end of the Republic… “the Republic” is already on life support and the wicked ones are trying to forever pull the plug. We’ve got nothing left to lose. I’d take a convention of states over what’s happening right now.
Then you’d truly hand over all the keys to the Communists.
Can you back yourself up with evidence?
They’re in our schools (not ‘them’ humanly speaking, but their philosophies). They’re in our churches (as fake Christians at times, humanly speaking). They’re in our universities. They’re in our justice system, and in our medical system, and in our economic system. Their Marxist philosophy has crept into every crevice of our infrastructure. —– agendadocumentary.com
Argumentative.
I so state the sun will rise tomorrow.
Must I prove the sun will rise tomorrow?
Convention of States, with the likely attendees, would be like replacing Dr. Healing Me with Dr. Euthanize Quickly. Can we count on ONLY patriots with due respect for our constitution and liberty to attend? Frying pan to fire IMO.
Only other way is to limit the service of politics to a six year service then out! (3 term Representative or 1 6 year Senate term, then out! Politics was set up to represent the people not to be lifetime job!
This should be the very first step Term limits for ALL (Congress and the Senate) should be the very first step.
Anouther step is to limit the jobs AFTER you serve in the government so you are not going directly into an influential position in say big Pharma or Boing. You would have to wait 5-10 years.
Oh yeah, paper voting (pretty sure some of these folks benefit from the current voting system)
You must also term limit Federal employment for what I think is your desired effect..
We already have tyranny of bureaucrats.
They know keep their heads down and the seasons will change.
Please add James Lankford (R-OK) and Mark Wayne Mullin (R-OK) to that list. These worthless scum and really democrats posing as Republicans.
Add Andrew GarbaRINO of NY too. Betrayed President Trump by voting in favor of the 1/6 commission on the excuse he was getting
$1.6 Billion for the region for road improvements. Almost Four years later and we’re still driving around on Peanut Brittle everywhere. He lost a primary challenge by 35 votes (yeah right – stole it by 35 votes) in a battle that got ZERO coverage in the media.
I’m voting for the Dem this cycle – cuz we can get rid of him in 2 years, but the RINO is Forever.
No, it cannot.
You can find that information on the Convention of States Project that Mark Meckler created for Term Limits.
https://conventionofstates.com/
It’s my understanding the Article V Convention of States would address one issue, and one issue only. It takes 30+ states to call a convention.
Given this has been in the works for years now, we need to “get crackin'” and push it forward now.
Correction JannB: the convention of states project you mention has three subject areas to consider
amendments 1. term limits for congress and federal officials. 2. fiscal restraint on the fed spending and 3. limits on the power and jurisdiction of the federal govt. It takes 34 states to call (2/3) . COS Action now has 19 of the 34.
Nope. Pandora’s Box.
Buzzy Bee: Pandora’s Box? Please explain your logic. Seriously. You must be misunderstanding how this works.
No.
The anwer was and still is no. The first was an incredible mess, and why MAdison was so fearful. The 10th Amendment, can do the deed without other States. Here is why: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/31271808
I leave you with alll blessings and this: “In religion and politics, people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue, but have taken them at second-hand, from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing.”
Autobiography of Mark Twain
I
In a state amending convention, amendments can only be proposed, not ratified. Thirty-eight states would have to ratify any amendment that came out of a state convention, as they do with any amendment that comes out of Congress. Bad, unpopular amendments don’t get any traction.
Even California’s Newsom has proposed an Article V state convention for a gun control measure for which he’d like to see an amendment. Last I looked not a single state has voted for his resolution to do this. Turns out, gun control is very unpopular.
Congress can write any amendment on any topic any day of the week. Why all the fear about amendments being written a different way in a different room? Why should we be more afraid of what comes of a state convention than Congress?
Because the leftists will hijack the proceedings is the argument against.
If as SD says you can limit it strictly to the one question I’m all for it.
The Constitution is for Moral men only. Where are they?
(Which of the Amendments actually improved the Constitution?)
Exactly. The current crop of attendees to a convention would be highly like to make things much worse. I’d rather see federal court appointees who restore all the pieces the judges have pruned off the Constitution, beginning with the legal tender clause.
Can’t count on judges either (as a whole), but yes you’re right about the current crop of attendees. Makes me shudder.
We must amend the Constitution because amending the Constitution would create amendments to amend the Constitution.
And the media would back them – “our democracy in action!”
There would also be cries of – “Let’s repeal the 2nd Amendment”
I net searched which constitutional amendments should be repealed and every entry resolved to repeal the 2nd amendment! Surprise. Surprise. Surprise.
Repealing the 2nd Amendment will be over our dead American bodies. I think we are all clear on that one. And by the way, our government is aiding and abetting, just shoveling in, tens of millions of military aged men from hostile countries all over the world, as fast as they can. And those guys are showing up at gun stores all over the country using their federally funded ATM cards. Their plan, is not to try and take away the 2nd Amendment. Their plan is to overwhelm and conquer us from inside. I think we’re all clear on that one too. There are going to be a lot of dead people if things don’t change.
Just sayin’.
I don’t know much about gun stores, but I do NOT understand why the gun stores can’t limit their sales to those with proof of citizenship. Then there is the background checks, which I figure vary between states. But I’m unsure that the invaders can just buy more guns here. They do, however, bring weaponry in with them. Or so I’ve read.
Exactly! And in this kind of Convention, what is to protect the 1st and 4th Amendments as well? The amount of meddling this opens a door to should makes us all think twice.
The Constitution is for Moral men only. Where are they?
A lot comes back to this. There wouldn’t need to be a recall provision if a moral and ethical Congress would police themselves as defined in the expulsion clause of the Constitution.
“If as SD says you can limit it strictly to the one question
I’m all for it….….I’m going to doublecheck to see if he’s correct.
No!!! It cannot be limited, no matter what!
What if the first vote taken is one to make all votes secret?? Now where’s the limit?
Even if the States pass limiting legislation, the States’ legislation is useless once the delegates begin the convention.
Article V grants to Congress (not the States) the power to “call” a convention.Delegates to an Article V convention are performing a federal function – they are not under the authority of the States.
Furthermore, Delegates are the sovereign representatives of The People (Declaration of Independence, 2nd para) and thus are vested with plenipotentiary powers to alter or abolish our form of government – our Constitution .
WHich amendment actually improved our Constitution? The Second Amendment, without doubt. Even if it is merely a paper tiger, its potential roar has been sufficient to curtail most extreme abuses of federal power to date.
If I was unclear I did not mean to imply no amendment was useful.
I do think several are damaging.
This one and also the 4th Amendment, but I suppose the 4th Amendment can be said to be protected by the 2nd one.
Your third sentence is key and your fourth question is also key. For Moral men only, and where are they? Where, indeed?
1 thru 10 for starters.
Because nobody you trust will be there.
Most likely.
because the Governors are just as corrupt?
I’ll have you know my Governor Li’l Mikey de Whine is pure as the driven snow!
I agree with all of the comments that preceded mine. We are not represented by a “moral people”. But repeal of the 17th would be a major step forward.
I appreciate Sundance saying that the agenda of a convention can be restricted to repeal of the 17th only. But there is no guarantee. The precedent already exists for a run away convention. When the brilliant and moral founders met in Philadelphia it was for the sole purpose of amending the Articles of Confederation. Instead, in their wisdom, they tore it up and gave us our Constitutional Republic.
Amendments can be proposed without a convention. Can they not also be repealed without one? How was prohibition repealed? When the idea of a convention was brought up Anton Scalia famously said “this is not a good century to re-write the Constitution”.
The amendment giving us Prohibition was not repealed.
Another amendment was passed rendering it null and void.
You cannot get Congress to pass an amendment to repeal the 17th. That would be akin to asking a hog to kick over his hog trough.
The states right now wouldn’t ratify it because they’re too busy vying for more slops from the federal trough.
If we cannot have honest elections, ow can we have an honest use of Article 5? Who wold be those people making these changes….. those in power will find a way to keep their power…
I was all for the Convention of States, but now, I do not trust …. who… who ARE these people who are making the changes…. and d we trust that it will be what they say.
As we watch the growing nature of the deep state, and the control they have actually accrued over the years, I am sure they have a “plan” for any convention.
A Convention leaves too much room for extra mischief. The attendees cannot be counted on to avoid unconstitutional mischief. I think it’s a Pandora’s Box that we would soon regret. While I agree the 17th should be repeated, I don’t agree that a Convention would stick to its business at hand and nothing else. What is to keep it within its bounds? We can’t even count on the American people to stick to the Constitution as intended by our Founders.
In this issue, here is the reason why the Article 5 was a compromise, as the first Convention was a cluster. NO controls can be
used to control the operation, and the Founding Documents are not the issue / Corrupt man is the issue. This powerpoint was built on the research by Publius-huldah: http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/41085340
There are prewritten Constitutions, and more. With the corruption we have currently, the idea is insanity walking. Again, this is why the 10th Amendment was placed in. Takes no 35-6 States, and is why the grifters melign the Amendment. This is not to belittle your thoughts B.King. The key is the documents are not the issue / the deception upon the American people is. To assist I pulled this link for your introspection:
https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2021/04/24/the-death-blow-an-article-v-convention-to-replace-our-constitution/
Be blessed, and please take no umbrage as none is intended. RAven6
No, it cannot. The New American online has many articles specifically outlining the dangers of this. If I may be permitted to list a few:
https://thenewamerican.com/us/politics/constitution/what-an-article-v-convention-is-and-is-not/
https://thenewamerican.com/print/article-v-convention-will-it-work/
https://thenewamerican.com/video/debunking-cos-natelson-false-claims-about-article-v-convention-name/
https://thenewamerican.com/us/politics/constitution/progressives-promote-article-v-convention-as-a-way-to-rethink-our-institutions-and-make-them-more-democratic/
Above all, remember this:
On Ratification of A (NEW) U.S. Constitution
The original Articles of Confederation required that any changes made be ratified by ALL of the states before it could become law. Before men were finished with our current U.S. Constitution, the ratification ONLY needed 3/4 of the states to ratify it. Do you see the difference? Who is to say that, at this time, whatever came out of an Article V Convention would be any different – say, like the ratification of the “new” constitution only needed a majority of the states on-board for ratification?
“In 1787, the document known as the Articles of Confederation was the constitution of the United States. Its Article XIII MANDATED that regarding any changes to the Articles: ‘Nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures OF EVERY STATE.”’
When the constitutional convention met in Philadelphia in May 1787, that legally binding and constitutional provision was IGNORED… There’s no debating that fact. There was a provision of the constitution prohibiting any changes to the Articles without unanimity – Article XIII. THAT provision was not only disregarded, but was REPLACED, eventually, by Article VII of the Constitution created at the convention.
“The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”
That’s quite a bit different. With the approval of that new provision, the unanimity rule and the constitution were replaced.
The differences between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution of 1787 are significant. Not the least of which was the method established for adopting those changes and endowing them with the force of law. WHAT ONCE REQUIRED A UNANIMOUS VOTE, NOW REQUIRED THE APPROVAL OF ONLY 3/4 OF THE STATES.
Glad this wasn’t password protected. Let everyone have easy access to this important content and begin the conversation. Like we say – “It’s all about the conversation.”
I agree as well, but unfortunately we are faced with the prospect of most states being just as corrupt as the feds. So not much hope there. MAGA based candidates at every level are our best option at this point, but it will take two generations to really make a difference and may be too late.
“…but unfortunately we are faced with the prospect of most states being just as corrupt as the feds.”
This idea was going through my mind as I read the post. So I ‘m having trouble seeing how repealing the 17th would improve things. I’ll reread the post and look at the comments to get more perspective.
It’s not intended to deal with the corruption; it’s intended to knee-cap the IC, and return the power back to the states at the expense of Federal power. The corruption would then be dealt with by the individual states…
^^^ THIS ^^^
I struggled also, so went back and read it again.
Tom Parsons reply is correct.
I will build on…
It would take more work for National/Global companies to corrupt Senators since they will need to bribe state legislators across multiple states.
Regardless, this proposal ignores the root problem- all politicians are corrupt parasites.
The solution is to repeal them all. Then replace with a much smaller government with limited terms.
Neither will ever happen, so I will stop typing.,,
In addition to the 17th, the 16th needs to be repealed also. The federal reserve act, which in my view is unconstitutional, needs to be nullified. The “fed” would then be abolished. They are why the government is in enormous debt.
No, its spending by congress with money it does not have. The Fed has to finance it via selling treasuries. Adn you have to get the treasuries to market via investment banks. Well yes, you can buy a treasury on the website, but this is not enough to fund all deficit spending. This why we want a balanced budget. No more deficit spending.
What allows the spending, monetization by the fed. No fed, no monetization, IOW, live within your means. We lived without an income tax for 130+ years. The founders never wanted an income tax. They believed at that time a man would not be deprived of his justly earned wages.
Why should we as taxpayers pay usury to use our own money? The FED is a privately owned bank who have been screwing America over since its inception in 1913. Our original Constitution For the United States specifically states that only Congress has the authority to print money.
Where does it show they can print money?? Article, Section, and clause please.
“Coining” money is not the same as printing money.
That’s where this goes off the rails and is the fear that many have. Others involved in an article 5 convention will want to add their specific changes too and that’s where it will go wrong.
As Sundance said, repeal the 17th and THAT’S IT.
P.S At one time, I was fully immersed in helping with an Article 5 convention but was pressured against it for the very reason above (it could be hijacked by the democrats and turned against us) but now things have changed and this might be the only way for the patriots to get a handle on congress. It might be a chance worth taking.
I’m with Sundance!
As we appear to be more in the grips of the Chinese Communist ideology than ever in history, I would be enlightened, and heartened, to understand the full contours of what exactly has changed for the better.
We’ve got patriots in jail and killed, and our apparently leader dodging bullets, and it’s ‘better’?
Barring a revolution, and of course being victorious in it, IMO we should clean out the Communists at the State and local levels, then focus on such matters as Constitutional conventions. In fact, I’d submit once the Communists are eradicated from our soil, the COTUS will function fine as is.
They problem isn’t the system, it’s the Communists. I call them what they are. The enemy. Then again, I’m not a lauded political debater, rather a grunt who for decades made the country go. It’s really simple from my chair. The enemy is in the gate.
The enemy is not merely in the gate, he sits in the halls of power.
Love the idea of clearing out local communists. Easier said than done, but I agree wholeheartedly that if this were done, and we weren’t having to keep fighting their agenda as much, more of our system would function as our Founders intended.
And if the risk proves to be too risky, so that regret is evident but too late….. mmmmm
Fisheggs, your view is correct. The Federal Reserve Act was unconstitutional. Congress has no authority to amend the Constitution except by amendment, but it did just that with this “act”. Congress only had the authority to “coin” money, not print it. Accordingly, and in concert with this restricting authority, the States agreed to only accept gold or silver coin in tender for payments (Article I, Section 10), a promise the States all seem to have forgotten.
Soros might just buy enough state legislators to buy the Senate seat. He buys everything else, so…
Good thought. Needs more work. We have to end all this cash flowing to politicians.
But that corruption is local. Those corrupt state legislators not only have to deal with local media, but they have to go home and live next to the citizens they are screwing over.
All that corrupt activity has now moved to the DC bubble.
Point well made dd_sc.
Even here in SC we’d have our hands full with the corruption in Columbia. But, like you said, bring this back from DC and it will bring a lot more attention on the activity in the state legislature. Maybe it would help.
Local politics can be easily as corrupt as national, but its texture and beneficiaries are far more visible and far less immune to correction and removal. National corruption is hidden away in large corporate offices and PACs, but a state legislator has far less camouflage and ability to avoid close contact with his community. This makes them likely to be less corrupt as a class,and certainly obliged to face community familiarity.
For me the issue is how do we know you can ensure an Article 5 convention can be limited to a single issue?
If you cannot, it is virtual constitutional suicide to open the basic contract between citizens and states to the wolfpack of demokrat insurgents from California and New York who will infest the convention.
Check out Rob Natelson ( a Conservative Constitutional law expert) who writes about the issue of Convention of States.
Very smart man.
Correct. Incredibly risky. And it’s only liberty at stake.
Local media is a joke even worse than national. No politician cares about the people they represent, not in my state. They are all bought.
Living next door to screwed-over citizens does not seem to have hampered Tim Walz, nor Kathy Hochul, nor Ron Shapiro, nor Katie Hobbs, nor JB Pritzker. I could add a few more, but you get the idea.
Another thing that would help is to break up the monopoly control of the media.
Most newspapers, radio and television stations are owned by a handful of corporations.
That is why we hear the exact same take on the exact same stories from nearly ALL media outlets.
Antitrust litigation has a place in combating that.
A free press needs to be free of government and corporate monopoly influence.
Makes me wonder how many he has already purchased.
Somebody here said yesterday that PDJT’s new Secretary of State will have the power to deport Soros, despite his “citizenship,” for threatening national security.
Sounds like a fine plan to me.
How did he answer the questions about nazi activities on his form N400 (application for citizenship)?
Might have to hire Elon to fly George and Alex one-way to Mars. I doubt that even the Norks would accept them as refugees.
I believe the only way to stop “cash flowing to politicians” is to make them less valuable to buy. If they did not have the power to give infinite amounts of money to those who buy them, then it would not be such a good investment. Now, though, if you buy a politician or two for a few million and they do something for your company, such as make a particular vaccine mandatory for children, then your company makes hundreds of millions of dollars for that investment. And the products don’t even have to work! Amazing, eh?
Brilliant Sundance!
We should repeal both the 17th Amendment and the 14th Amendment birthright citizenship clause that has been misinterpreted since 1868. It would help end illegal immigration. Or, just repeal the whole damned 14th Amendment.
One of so many illogical and harmful SC decisions.
Throw sand where you can.
Maybe, just maybe with Musk controlling X, and China controlling TIc, there might be a way to coordinate broad support for a Convention of States.
Most if not all other social media and the MSM would do everything possible to lie and disrupt the effort. Since the IC is the entity that would be the most negatively impacted, it would really be a media war to get off the ground.
Di qui nacque che tutti li profeti armati vincero, e li disarmati rovinarono.
[Hence it happened that all the armed prophets conquered, all the unarmed perished].
– Niccolo Machiavelli
The history books say the 17th amendment exists because of rampant corruption in the selection of senators. Are you claiming this is untrue? Do you think repealing the 17th amendment will leave us with different senators? It seems more likely that the existing senators – who wield great power – will use it to ensure they remain in power.
I am not opposed to restoring things to the way the founders envisioned them, but I am not under any delusions that it will fix things. The root problem is that as a country, we have abandoned faith in God. Until we return to our faith, repealing amendments, passing new ones, reforming elections, impeaching judges, … none of it will do any good.
Repealing the 17th would shift the power back to the states, and would knee-cap the IC and the Washington D.C. power base. The issue of the rampant corruption would be taken up by the individual states themselves…
The states need the ability to recall congressmen. I believe this would cure a lot of what ails us.
Not necessarily. I would not want an otherwise good congressman recalled if it’s someone I support. So if states can do that, it needs to be done thru representation and vote of the people (with voter integrity).
Yes, corruption will still exist, it would just be somewhat closer to the average citizen……..maybe.
Closer to the citizen so they could express displeasure more easily.
And the closer to the voter / citizen the easier or faster to deal with.
Sundance doesn’t deny the state-level corruption; he points it out –
Prior to the 17th amendment, there was significant state level corruption….
But that corruption was local. Corrupt state legislators and the people buying them off had to deal with local media, and then go home and live next to the people they were screwing over.
All that corruption occurs in the DC bubble and its various silos.
Living next door to screwed-over citizens does not seem to have hampered Tim Walz, nor Kathy Hochul, nor Ron Shapiro, nor Katie Hobbs, nor JB Pritzker. I could add a few more, but you get the idea.
But they don’t; they live in isolated and gated communities from the citizens which they have already ground into powder, but the power would be diffused away from D.C.
Because they are not currently answerable to the screwed over locals, but are answerable to their Globalist masters.
No, Soros has bought my state’s Gov, SoS and AG. The corruption only shifted. Same players. Same result. Stolen state forthcoming. Naive to think otherwise. Absolutely naive. The cash will flow. Until you stop that cash flow, expect corruption at that level same same.
17th changed us from a Constitutional Republic to a pure democracy and the results are evident.
Repeal won’t fix everything but would it not be helpful?
It would serve to cut up the problem into more manageable bites, instead of keeping it an intact monolith.
Divide and conquer.
I have a different and easier reform. Break up the entire federal bureaucracy into two parts, the equivalent to the military enlisted men and commissioned officers. The “COs” would have four five year terms. Up or out after the each five years and done after the fourth . No more employment by the US gov after that. The “enlisted” types could stay until retirement but have no policy authority. Your suggestion will never be implemented because of the enormous difficulty of making such a very large change to the Constitution.
Absolutely!
I worked for a while with a group of patriots in NC fighting off the legislation to sign onto a Constitutional Convention. I ran into ConCon weasels in all sorts of gatherings and debates.
After hearing them layout their case to rip wide open the Constitution, I would challenge them to to prove their true loyalties, and win over us patriot citizens who oppose them. Will you first, simply lead the charge to repeal the 17th Amendment?
The room usually got quiet except for slow clapping from the patriots in the room.
Repeal of the 17th amendment would require massive funding and an organization of believers. How would you get that when the media will take the negatives of appointment and claim white supremacist states want to secede, or some other lie.
Prior to the 17th amendment, there was significant state level corruption as business interests and senate candidates worked in power groups with party officials to attain the position. Politicians seeking Senate seats began campaigning for state legislative candidates in order to assemble support.The state legislative races then became a process of influence amid powerful interests seeking to support their Senate candidate. Get the right people in the State legislature and you can get the Senator appointed.
This seems to say that corruption just shifted from state to federal level. If we approached this from a baby steps that are achievable, we could get there. Start with term limits. One senate term, that’s it, set the terms in line with state governors, and no lobbying job when they leave.
Strategy would be that a friendly congress would give America two options. 17th amendment repeal or term limits for all. Given that the public may easily agree to term limits, congress would work to repeal 17th to avoid term limits.
Always give people two options and they will inevitably pick one. Sundance gives us 2 paths but they are part of the same choice. We need two choices that make repeal the preferred choice.
The heart of [unregenerate] man is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Indeed, who can know it. Jeremiah 17:9.
This truth will remain whatever strategy we adopt to circumvent it and right this ship..
John Adams knew this well, as most of you also know: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Where is Jonathan Edwards when we need him? The Brits, George Whitfield and Charles Haddon Spurgeon? The German, Martin Luther?
Truth be told, itching ears simply will not put up with Gospel Truth. Modern man is far too sophisticated to be bothered with, much less touched, by God’s love in Christ.
“What we have here is a failure to communicate,” as chain-gang leader, actor Strother Martin noted in Cool Hand Luke.
But, God is communicating with us.
If we’re not responding to Him, we may indeed lose this blessed country he’s gifted to us.
Sorry Harriet but maybe you replied to the wrong post. 17th amendment, not proselytizing, is the conversation.
Feasability? 34 for convention 38 for ratification. Now go and look at states, who controls their state congress and governors mansion. No rules/No limits. That’s the diabolical problem with 17 it is self healing.
Trump Day 1.
Block Langley with tanks. 90% of the problem goes away.
All contrails lead to Langley. 👍
And enslaved us with the 16th…the two go hand in hand.
Oh yes, the 17th amendment, a Progressive dream come true… And, of course, Woodrow Wilson was president…
17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Direct Election of U.S. Senators (1913)
Passed by Congress on May 13, 1912, and ratified on April 8, 1913, the 17th Amendment modified Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution by allowing voters to cast direct votes for U.S. senators. Prior to its passage, senators were chosen by state legislatures.
The Constitution, as it was adopted in 1788, made the Senate an assembly where the states would have equal representation. Each state legislature would elect two senators to six-year terms. Late in the 19th century, some state legislatures deadlocked over the election of a senator when different parties controlled different houses — Senate vacancies could last months or years. In other cases, special interests or political machines gained control over the state legislature. Progressive reformers dismissed individuals elected by such legislatures as puppets and the Senate as a “millionaires’ club” serving powerful private interests.
One Progressive response to these concerns was the “Oregon system,” which utilized a state primary election to identify the voters’ choice for senator while pledging all candidates for the state legislature to honor the primary’s result. Over half of the states adopted the “Oregon system,” but the 1912 Senate investigation of bribery and corruption in the election of Illinois Senator William Lorimer indicated that only a constitutional amendment mandating the direct election of senators by a state’s citizenry would satisfy public demands for reform.
In 1910 and 1911, the House passed proposed amendments for the direct election of senators. This would be done by vesting complete control of Senate elections in state governments. They included, however, a “race rider” meant to bar federal intervention in cases of racial discrimination among voters. Supporters of the clause claimed that it guaranteed state sovereignty, while opponents saw it as a workaround to override the will of Black Americans who had the right to vote as conferred by the 15th Amendment.
A substitute amendment by Senator Joseph L. Bristow of Kansas provided for the direct election of senators without the “race rider.” The Senate adopted the amended joint resolution on a close vote in May 1911. Over a year later, the House accepted the change, and on April 8, 1913, the resolution became the 17th amendment.
Source here: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/17th-amendment
It was pivotal in undermining the Republic. Not long after, Franklin Roosevelt consolidated the Marxist parties (Progressive and Socialist) into the Democrat Party. CIA and Uniparty soon to follow.
I disagree. The problem stems from the ability of the federal government to print money. That is how they keep states in line and how money flows to corporations and departments.
“The biggest issue following the passage of the 17th amendment became Senators who were no longer representing the interests of their state. Instead, they were representing the interests of the power elite groups who were helping them fund the mechanisms of their re-election efforts.
Over time, the Senate chamber itself began using their advice and consent authority to control the executive and judicial branch.”
The 17th ensured the states would have dwindling influence over the centralization of power under the Federal government. The neo-fascist model now sucking the the last bit of blood out of us seems the inevitable steady state.
No, the problem is the government borrowing money and paying interest on money it never intends to repay. The government needs to spend money into existence, and the money would be spent mainly for industrial production, wages, and infrastructure.
The Use and Abuse of MMT – Prime (primeeconomics.org)
This is about economics, monetary policy, budget deficits, and MMT. It is by Michael Hudson and is 11 pages. If you only read one thing, read this.
That link would not format in my browser. Here is an alternative link
https://heterodox.economicblogs.org/prime-policy-research-macroeconomics/2020/hudson-abuse-mmt
Such clarity; nice, Sundance.
An intriguing idea of a Article V convention solely for repeal of the 17th Amendment.
The concern I have is how the State’s Legislatures are going to keep the Deep State from inserting their agents into their delegations to that convention to hijack the convention away from that designated purpose.
Mission creep. The govt and its members have little self restraint.
At the current number of states, amendments need 38 states to put it in the constitution. Maybe a start would be to list states in order of probability. Much like a presidential vote map. Deep red, pink, leaners, tossups, purple, deep blue, etc. I would say if deep red thru pink is not at least 32-35, it’s not worth the risk.
Let me clarify. If elections had been uncorrupted for the last decades, then they would probably be closer to Reagan victories and then it would be a walk in the park. Under current elections, it’s much closer to 50-50 obviously. Need to really clean up vote (ballot) stuff first.
A minor example of the issues wrought by the 17th amendment:
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/pentagon-refuses-rule-out-strikes-moscow-shocking-exchange-ukraines-incursion-kursk
Nobody has the power to stop this insanity before Jan 25.
Heck yeah! Repeal the 17th!
This post brings to mind a Treeper from several years back who passed away, PatrickHenryRevisited. May God rest his soul.
Why a Convention of States will never succeed:
Blue States will also be sending their representatives to a CoS, and the goal of the Blue States is the abolition of the USA as an independent sovereign nation-state, the abolition of the US Constitution, and the subordination of Americans under the Agenda 21/2030 dictates of the UN-WEF-WHO-BIS-NATO Technocratic Cabal.
Never say never. You are correct in your assessment of the blue states. They will attempt to hijack the convention for their own evil purposes. Don’t forget, though, that the red states outnumber the blue states. Also remember that there are millions of red blooded Americans living in each one of those blue states. If a COS becomes a reality then it falls to We the People to hold our States accountable.
My two cents;
We The People do not need President Trump.
We The People want President Trump.
President Trump has earned all of the due respect and honor that any US citizen could ever aspire to achieve.
Trust God. Fear not.
AMEN thank you Sundance i have always held you in the highest regard but lately you have been just hitting it out of the park every day much love respect and appreciation . Blessings to you and yours be well
R.D.
Thank you, Sundance!
It is critical that Trump fire every political appointee in the executive branch, and be prepared to leave all of these upper echelon positions vacant unless the Senate committees vote to confirm his nominees. This will throw a monkey wrench into a system that depends upon these actors to represent their departments in hearings, deliver budgetary requests, and so on. Simultaneously, Trump needs to work up budget proposals that starve every agency (they are all bloated) of operating funds. The objective is to sow throw enough sand into the gears to bring the whole edifice slowly grinding to a halt.
Our Constitutional Republic is almost completely dead and buried; bold action is required. I understand some of the fears about a convention of the States. I also understand that if we don’t pursue this course of action we have no chance whatsoever of saving our Republic.
Sundance is right.
Might want to check out the Convention of States Action website to learn more about the process, and the progress of the movement.
A good first place to start in educating yourself.
Wow… Sundance talking convention of states. I agree, wholly focused on removing the 17th Amendment. So many many millions of people have wanted a convention of states to regain our various states’ authority so we could regain our own authority over our own lives. But, there was never just one really good reason to call for one without the waters being forever muddied. Excellent post.
Sundance – you are a treasure. Most of us would have thrown up our hands by now and just laid down, accepting God’s judgement on our country for all its collective wickedness. You are hacking through the jungle, finding a path, and working on specific solutions. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
These people can’t read Sundance!
Many are already adding more changes. SMH. I withdraw my support if Treepers are going to change what Sundance wrote. He is the only one I will support. We had this conversation 10 years ago. I brought it up. Sundance was against it UNLESS the 17 amendment was repealed.
He was of the opinion that it would provide an opening for others to muddy up the works and make changes that would open us up to being hijacked. That was when I dropped the idea. I have and always have had a lot of respect for our host and if he didn’t think it was a good idea……Sundance if I am misrepresenting anything you thought at the time, please feel free to correct me.
Do you ever calculate in societal moral collapse for a success rate? If more of the country thinks like Europe, Uganda, Mexico or whatever and no longer cares about history or the constitution then there is no path to fix corruption which feeds on a foolish, ignorant, corrupt society like ours is clearly becoming.
Thank you Sundance for explaining how the 17th Amendment created a Congressional body more aligned with protecting the interests of the federal government than with protecting the interests of the Senator’s state and his or her constituents.
Also I appreciate your suggestions of the recall ability and Convention of the States.
If you are going to dream, you might as well dream big. And once you can visualize the changes needed you can start to delineate how we get from here to there.
Your ideas are inspiring and exciting!
I love the idea.
It almost sounds as impossible as getting term limits passed, though. The people in power aren’t going to vote in favor of anything where they lose their power. The newbies coming into government don’t campaign on term limits, so once they get in office and the donors get ahold of them they are never going to be in favor of anything that takes away their power/money. Hamster wheel is what comes to mind. 😡
A thought:
What about – within our sovereign states – organizing to defeat “jungle primaries” through our state legislatures – these “jungle primaries” are a further incursion –
work to eliminate “jungle primaries” within our states and – as well – citizens working to prevent “jungle primaries” ever being approved WITHIN STATES in the first place if they have not already been instituted.
Not asking the RNC or the DNC for their permission, input or “help” – but citizens across the board damn sick and tired of the mess politicians have made in and for their individual states.
This is something not even requiring a convening of a Constitutional Convention –
this is push back, state by state –
and what about this possibility:
state legislatures individually voting to TAKE BACK what was TAKEN AWAY by the 17th Amendment –
while at it, a term limit decided BY THE INDIVIDUAL AND SOVEREIGN STATES ON how many terms their Senators can be in office.
I agree with the repeal of the 17th. We will all have to work very hard to get people to pay attention to their State legislators and actually vote. We let things slip in Texas, and are beginning to get back Citizen control of the legislature. It’s a long road, but we are seeing some improvement.
💥 💥 💥 💥 💥 💥 💥
The 17th!!! Along with the 16th and Federal Reserve Act were all ‘Bankster’ created, funded and pressured onto the public in 1913. ALL TIED TOGETHER!!
And their enforcement arm slipped in later – The IC!!!!!
1 post – and it summed it all up for those with eyes to see. 👀
Ok fine, but . . . undoing that damage will not be a simple process. Those forces also control Big Tech and what is left of the media. Do you see a path to it?
That is the good I see in the JD Vance VP slot, a PDJT/MAGA alliance with Musk,Thiel, & some others. Plus PDJT has Truth Social. They will be fighting the full power of the anti-american traitors from the Council On Foreign Relations who control the media, many Corporations, & in government (many critical positions)
TRUMP
Mark Levin wrote a book on need for a convention of states…..we need applicants for the senate to back The repeal.
the problem in our country is BIG money
As George Carlin said, “This country was bought and paid for a long time ago”.
yes, he did and at least five of his suggested amendments did the exact opposite of what he intends them to do. Some “expert”.
The push for temperance should have been on enacting seventeenth amendment. Sadly, it was missed by one amendment and six years.
James Burnham – The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom (Full Audiobook)
In case you haven’t noticed the republic is all but gone already. Our federal executive branch has devolved into tyranny where the ABC agencies persecute opponents of their rule – such as J6 protestors. The Judicial branch which was supposed to uphold our constitutional rights has become bought and paid for as it the passage of the corrupt Affordable Care Act which delivered control of medicine to the federal government – just ask any hospital administrator. And lastly Congress which was always corrupt but in the last decades sells votes to the highest bidder which is typically the owners of the central banks and multi-national corporations (excuse me for repeating myself).
The only way I can see a way of restoring ordered liberty is via local and state governments influenced by local people to refuse to enforce unconstitutional bureaucratic edicts. We the People must force the federal government to downsize to needed functions only. As Sundance points out this has never been done before but unless we try we will never know if it can be done.
I agree.
I question if many senators even know how to function on their own. They are purchased, selected, and then follow the dictates of the industrial/banker blob that actually rules.
Are any of them capable of functioning independently without being directed?
I see senators on cell phones, absent from their seats, or occasionally bloviating for the cameras.
I wonder if they are actually up to independently performing the job if they had the freedom. Except for an occasional dissent, they appear to be an entity in lockstep.
Logically, one would think that a Senator, voted in by the citizens of his state, would have the interests of those citizens at heart. But instead, the Senate now protects the federal government. How do you ‘guarantee’ that, if it is State legislatures that are electing Senators, that a similar situation (protection of the feds) doesn’t continue?
However, thanks to SD’s explanation, I now understand the reason why the founding fathers created the Senate in such a way. Initially, I would have felt that allowing the state citizens to elect their representatives in the Senate was giving the citizens more of a voice in their government. As an aside, I look at the painting at the beginning of this article, and wish that we had the same caliber of men at the helm, in order to get us out of this political mess…..
Under the current system, for any lobbying group to gain control of the US Senate, they merely need to purchase one hundred people, maximum.
If the original system is reinstated, such lobbying groups would have to purchase the legislatures of as many as fifty states, comprising thousands of legislators.
Kind of a self limiting enterprise.
Bingo!
Good start.
Agree!! The 17th Amendment caused the nationalization of Senate races resulting in those being elected to focus on keeping their power and not on their constituents or their State’s best interests.
Agreed. COS needs called, with limits on what they can touch.
Everything you say is true, but for more than a hundred years it has been drilled into every high-schooler’s head that the amendment was a win for democracy. No one has ever challenged that idea successfully.
The 17th Amendment:
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.
An individual and sovereign state voting to revert to the pre-17th Amendment method of choosing a Senator and he or she indeed IS elected by the people thereof THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE which they elected.
The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
I don’t really understand this part – electors are the voters, are they not? Someone will clarify for me. Could this be where we have an opening through which to steer this ship of state and not run aground as we might in a Constitutional Convention, but bring it back to the State Legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
“Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments” – does this signify that actually the State Legislature has the power as to whether or not the executive can make a temporary appointment?
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
“Obviously this would be an ugly battle.”
The battle to wrest control of our Republic from those who have usurped our nation from the will of the people for their own power mad, corrupt, self enriching, amoral, despotic purposes is by definition going to be long and hard fought.
I think we all now have a deep understanding of what it cost those who gave their lives and fortunes to secure what has slipped away from us. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say what was deliberately taken in the dark recesses of evil minds with evil intent.
Machiavelli speaks of a “new system”….
Jacob Siegel has written of a “new” system which has been in place since Obama, something called the ” Whole of Society” system, and I will leave a link to the lengthy essay which explains this perfectly. It blends well with what Sundance has been writing about for a very long time.
From that essay…
“‘Whole of Society’ is a totalizing form of politics. It discards the traditional separation of powers and demands political participation from corporations, civic groups, and other nonstate actors.”
The public/private partnership so beloved of Fascists… and all the -ists… and authoritarians since WWII. Notice which “partner” comes first.
There can be no denying our Republic has been transmogrified into a One Party State by members of all of the above who have a death grip on the whip hand. Some might call it Communism…under a different name.
And so I go back to what, on my return to the country of my birth after an absence of twenty years, struck me straight way. We have grown too big and as a result are too far removed from the centre of power. That is the fetid, decaying DC swamp filled with those who are quite happy and benefiting from the way things are now. The next step for those who have spit upon our nation is to cede whatever sovereignty we have left to even bigger forces…globalism, all but a fait accompli if somehow the depraved duo of Harris and Walz (who have no love for this country or its citizens) manage to cheat their way into office.
We are in a war for the soul of this battered and divided nation. Wars are won one battle at a time. Herculean and heroic efforts will be required. Whether or not we can remain the form which our Founding Fathers constructed and which worked for hundreds of years remains to be seen. I do pray we can do so. But I think we have to be prepared for all possibilities in these godless, chaotic times.
Our form of government was an experiment and succeeded. I think it is worth whatever we can do constitutionally to preserve it. For the sake of generations who follow us.
If God is for us, who can be against us?
His will be done…
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/whole-society-american-politics