Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Discussion Arising from OKC 2nd Amendment Rally
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mugsy" data-source="post: 2072172" data-attributes="member: 18914"><p>VM,</p><p></p><p>I don't think I agree with you that it would make no difference. It's true that States can make their own rules for the actual selection of Senators and some, would allow for popular election but others might not or they might act as checks upon those candidates that seemed to be opposed to State interest - in any event at least it would be the State's choice, their choice, not a permanent bar preventing the State from acting. I also believe that the looming possibility of the State acting would, in and of itself, be a brake upon a rampant abuse of the Federal system. In fact, if it was so good and the popular election of Senator's was never in doubt then why was there any move to amend the Constitution to begin with? Someone, i.e. the Progressives of that era, believed that it was necessary to ensure that no State could back-track or try to return to the originally designed system.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mugsy, post: 2072172, member: 18914"] VM, I don't think I agree with you that it would make no difference. It's true that States can make their own rules for the actual selection of Senators and some, would allow for popular election but others might not or they might act as checks upon those candidates that seemed to be opposed to State interest - in any event at least it would be the State's choice, their choice, not a permanent bar preventing the State from acting. I also believe that the looming possibility of the State acting would, in and of itself, be a brake upon a rampant abuse of the Federal system. In fact, if it was so good and the popular election of Senator's was never in doubt then why was there any move to amend the Constitution to begin with? Someone, i.e. the Progressives of that era, believed that it was necessary to ensure that no State could back-track or try to return to the originally designed system. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Discussion Arising from OKC 2nd Amendment Rally
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom