I would agree re the 17 th amendment. & with such the 10 ademendt lost strength In a message dated 9/13/2009 1:44:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, shempmcg...@netscape.net writes:
The 17th amendment to the constitution transferred the appointment of U.S. senators from state legislatures to the people through popular vote. This happened in 1913. It seems to me that Big Government only started after that. And much of federal spending occurred in areas that many claim is under state jurisdiction, such as insurance (e.g. Social Security, Medicare). Indeed, I even heard on one of the TV talk shows this morning that ObamaCare may even be unconstitutional for that very reason. I wonder if there is a connection. That is, by transferring the appointment from a body -- the state legislature -- which would have its own interests at heart (i.e., state jurisdiction) more than anyone or anything else that this, more than anything, caused spending on the federal level to go out of control. Now, this is wholly my idea so if you want to call me nutty (not the first time), go ahead. But if my analysis above is correct then I am surprised there is not a movement afoot to repeal the 17th amendment, particularly amongst those Americans concerned with out of control spending by the federal government. Also, for those peaceniks who are always concerned about America going to war, perhaps without being able to spend at will and with senators appointed by states there would be less initiative to go to war. ------------------------------------ To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
