It's also worth noting that the Reynolds v. Sims decision did this concept in on the state level, giving the big cities control - for example, I believe Maryland once had 24 Senators (one for each county plus Baltimore City, which is governed like a county). Delaware still has 21 Senators, but now they are by district instead of seven per county as the Delaware Constitution once prescribed.
So instead of what would probably be a 17-7 or so GOP majority in Maryland, it's a 34-13 Democrat majority (and pretty much has been since 1972, when the Senate was expanded to 47.) In Delaware perhaps a 12-9 or 13-8 GOP lean is 15-6 the other way, with most of the districts crammed into true-blue New Castle County.
This amendment did more damage to state's rights and rural America than you know.
The 17th has been disastrous. It breaks representation. Congress reps the people. The senate reps the states. Therefore the state legislators should select the reps. I don't understand why this is so hard to understand.
Speaking of 2A. This same manner of thinking is applied in it. The first part (concerning militias) is specifically talking about the states. Then you get a comma, and it talks about the rights of the people (no longer talking about states) shall not be infringed. (I've got a piece on this one concerning that comma and the use English, that you might find interesting).
Time and time again the founders made clear separations but modern politicians continue to muddy the waters.
Like you, I find it astonishing how little people understand what A17 has done TO us. Was talking to a 'conservative' friend of mine, and she got all up in her feels when I suggested we should return senate elections back to the states. "Butbutbut muh Senators!" was basically the reaction. Maddening.
Funny you should mention that about 2A - I too, have been working on a breakdown of it, to counter the Globalist (deliberate?) misinterpretation of, "well-regulated militia.' That article is still in the simmering stage, however, thus I look forward to reading your take first.
Glad to have connected with you on Notes - digging your takes, and your posts. Also, thanks for the restack - appreciate it muchly!
I agree. The Declaration has no legal force however. Rand Paul, Lee, Cruz, Cotton and any other GOP Senators who claim to be constitutionalists should be called on to pledge their vote on ending the 17th. The same pledge should be demanded during the primaries for new Senators. As to the 16th. Rob Natelson makes a good argument for why it was contemplated and indeed countenanced in the Constitution. That usually gets an angry response but read his work first. It should be a 1% flat tax if anything to service the interest on the debt going forward.
And I thought I was alone in beating this drum.
It's also worth noting that the Reynolds v. Sims decision did this concept in on the state level, giving the big cities control - for example, I believe Maryland once had 24 Senators (one for each county plus Baltimore City, which is governed like a county). Delaware still has 21 Senators, but now they are by district instead of seven per county as the Delaware Constitution once prescribed.
So instead of what would probably be a 17-7 or so GOP majority in Maryland, it's a 34-13 Democrat majority (and pretty much has been since 1972, when the Senate was expanded to 47.) In Delaware perhaps a 12-9 or 13-8 GOP lean is 15-6 the other way, with most of the districts crammed into true-blue New Castle County.
This amendment did more damage to state's rights and rural America than you know.
The 17th has been disastrous. It breaks representation. Congress reps the people. The senate reps the states. Therefore the state legislators should select the reps. I don't understand why this is so hard to understand.
Speaking of 2A. This same manner of thinking is applied in it. The first part (concerning militias) is specifically talking about the states. Then you get a comma, and it talks about the rights of the people (no longer talking about states) shall not be infringed. (I've got a piece on this one concerning that comma and the use English, that you might find interesting).
Time and time again the founders made clear separations but modern politicians continue to muddy the waters.
Good article.
Like you, I find it astonishing how little people understand what A17 has done TO us. Was talking to a 'conservative' friend of mine, and she got all up in her feels when I suggested we should return senate elections back to the states. "Butbutbut muh Senators!" was basically the reaction. Maddening.
Funny you should mention that about 2A - I too, have been working on a breakdown of it, to counter the Globalist (deliberate?) misinterpretation of, "well-regulated militia.' That article is still in the simmering stage, however, thus I look forward to reading your take first.
Glad to have connected with you on Notes - digging your takes, and your posts. Also, thanks for the restack - appreciate it muchly!
It's one Iwill keep sharing out. We as a society have no clue what sentence structure is now. It is maddening. Here's the link:
https://carboncopyman.substack.com?utm_source=navbar&utm_medium=web&r=ms3jd
That people can ignore the meaning of a comma annoys me to no end!!!
I agree. The Declaration has no legal force however. Rand Paul, Lee, Cruz, Cotton and any other GOP Senators who claim to be constitutionalists should be called on to pledge their vote on ending the 17th. The same pledge should be demanded during the primaries for new Senators. As to the 16th. Rob Natelson makes a good argument for why it was contemplated and indeed countenanced in the Constitution. That usually gets an angry response but read his work first. It should be a 1% flat tax if anything to service the interest on the debt going forward.
Sharing to my FB group, too.
Thanks so much, Angela! Really appreciate that ☺️
Dude! If this was church you'd be getting a Hallelujah and an Amen from the first pew to all the way by the door. Absolutely spot on!
Thanks so much, Jessica - very gracious of you! Appreciate your support, AND your awesome content on Notes 🫡
Another excellent piece, sir.
Thanks so much, Scott. I am always grateful for your encouragement and support!
You are most welcome!👊🏻
And you would have a valid argument, though I might counter that by saying the War was not the first nail IN the coffin... but the coffin itself :-)
Either way, appreciate the comment! *salute
I understand that desire, and I may get fully-invested in that perspective very VERY soon. I'm just not QUITE there... yet. ;-)
Always appreciate your thoughts, brother... also appreciate the restack :-)