• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who supports the 17th amendment

Do you support the 17th amendment


  • Total voters
    55

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,738
Reaction score
6,290
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The text of the this particular 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.

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.

The direct election senators.... why is this so controversial now?
 
The text of the this particular amendment.
The direct election senators.... why is this so controversial now?

Because GOPs control over 30 state legislatures and would be able to appoint up to 70 Senators ...
 
The text of the this particular amendment.



The direct election senators.... why is this so controversial now?

I don't like it because it robs states of their representation in Washington and replaces loyalty to the state with loyalty to the Party.
 
I don't like it because it robs states of their representation in Washington and replaces loyalty to the state with loyalty to the Party.

Loyalty to the party exists regardless of system.

But it is ultimately the people who are ultimately the ones responsible for who they elect.
 
Loyalty to the party exists regardless of system.

But it is ultimately the people who are ultimately the ones responsible for who they elect.

So Collins and Amash are the same? No they're not. Senators need to be held responsible all of the time instead of only once every six years.
 
Loyalty to the party exists regardless of system.

But it is ultimately the people who are ultimately the ones responsible for who they elect.

Not exactly. At large (statewide) elections prevent gerrymandering from altering reality. This allows for "purple" sets of Senators that would (very likely) not occur without the 17A.

One can certainly debate the merits of a state voting to cancel itself but the 17A (more) allows for that possibility.
 
So Collins and Amash are the same? No they're not. Senators need to be held responsible all of the time instead of only once every six years.

Congressmen and senators are held accountable at the ballot box, in town halls, and with every letter and phone call made by constituents.
 
Congressmen and senators are held accountable at the ballot box, in town halls, and with every letter and phone call made by constituents.

How about held accountable immediately? I like that better.
 
Outside of a hardcore small group of right wingers, this is NOT at all controversial. They hate the 17th because it brings government closer to the people and they despise the vote of the people because they know they are a small minority whose radical ideas and whack job agenda goes nowhere with the people against them.
 
How about held accountable immediately? I like that better.

You mean make senators slaves of the state legislatures.

Yeah, and I have a feeling that you are implying that Democratic senators representing states with republican controlled legeslatures are a problem?
 
And is that a bad thing?

Maybe, it depends on if you want your state's Senators to vote against each other, effectively saying "duh" (nothing at all) is your state's official position instead of either yes or no on a given issue. ;)
 
Maybe, it depends on if you want your state's Senators to vote against each other, effectively saying "duh" (nothing at all) is your state's official position instead of either yes or no on a given issue. ;)

Representing ones state is a non partisan issue, and I am perfectly certain that a States interests can be represented by having a senator from both parties.

Indiana and Ohio each have one democrat and one republican senator representing them, and I don't think that is a problem.
 
The people that elect them somehow are not represented by popularly electing a senator?

Once every 6 years? If this is really about the people why not once every 2 years? Like the House?
 
The direct election senators.... why is this so controversial now?
Uh, yeah, it kind of isn't.

There are a few right-wingers who hate the idea of democratic elections (small "d") for senators. Most adults accept it as normal.
 
Once every 6 years? If this is really about the people why not once every 2 years? Like the House?

The election of senators should not be dependent on who controls the state legislature. Senators are elected by the people of the entire state, regardless of who controls the legislature.

Is it a problem that a state can have a republican controlled legislature yet its citizens can still elect a democratic senator.

If you want to get rid of politicans you oppose, there is a thing called a "recall election."
 
The election of senators should not be dependent on who controls the state legislature. Senators are elected by the people of the entire state, regardless of who controls the legislature.

Is it a problem that a state can have a republican controlled legislature yet its citizens can still elect a democratic senator.

If you want to get rid of politicans you oppose, there is a thing called a "recall election."

You didn't answer my question. Why 6 years for Senators and only 2 for House members?
 
Back
Top Bottom