# On repealing the 17th Amendment **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 28, 2017, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461 "2017-12-28T14:41:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/81 "2018-01-02T23:38:19Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The shifting of the goal posts is nothing new here. Who’s doing it? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/82 "2018-01-03T00:20:06Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Pardon me while I consult the liberal hive mind, to see if they have a clue what the hell you are talking about. > > This might take a long time. That might take a really long time. I’ll wait here. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/83 "2018-01-03T00:29:56Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > That might take a really long time. > > I’ll wait here. The majority of the country answered my call. They have no damn clue why you think the 17th Amednment has anything to do with the electoral college. We all await an explaination of how you got these concepts so fucked up. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/84 "2018-01-03T01:46:50Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > If you got nothin’, then it’s better to just not post that fact. > > Since you ask: The \*constitutional \*nature of the US never changed by force of arms, but its \*political \*nature certainly did. After the war, national politics were no longer dominated or constrained, by the slavery issue (other, related issues did spring up, of course), and the idea that secession was allowable (it never was) was put to rest. The states’ rights issue (which is contrary to the Supremacy Clause - see, there’s that Constitution again!) that was previously used to justify slavery and later used for Jim Crow (and still is) lingered, and still does, but with ever-decreasing ability of its supporters to claim it’s about anything respectable. > > This is all basic Civics Class stuff, really. States rights was never used to justify slavery. Seceding states explicitly complained that some states were using states rights to nullify the fugitive slave law. Your history is broken and in need of rehabilitation since 1960s era “Civics Class”. You want an argument on the constitutionality of secession. I wasn’t making claims on those grounds but since you are begging for it here goes: I’ll make this quick. When Virginia, New York and other states ratified the Constitution, in their articles of ratification they clarified that the ability of a state to leave the Union was retained under the Constitution. James Madison stated that the articles of ratification and the debates on their adoption are the sources from which we interpret the Constitution. The articles of ratification for these states were accepted, and all states retain the same rights under the Constitution. The same terms apply to all states under the Constitution ( it says that somewhere). In Texas V. White the government declared that the states do not have this right. So at some moment between the ratification of the Constitution and Texas V. White, the constitutionality of secession changed. The original poster implied it was with the Civil War that the change took place. Unless you think that Supreme Court decisions are constitutionally pure and divorced from obvious political considerations, I’m having a hard time understanding why you’re having a hard time. Under your line of argument, is it true that the constitutionality of all government actions had remained the same, but some powers were “discovered” later on? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/85 "2018-01-03T01:51:29Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Is your definition of tyranny how a country treats its own people, or how it treats other people? > > I guess this is nitpicking, but I’d use other words to describe a government that invades neighbors and so on. I think the common use of the word tyranny would be the use of government force against its own people in unfair ways. And if that is the case, I think the average American is probably much more concerned about how they are treated by cops than whether the metadata of their phone calls is being used in a secret way. I agree but even the tyrannical actions of cops(local usually, though some state and federal) is small potatoes compared to US government actions. Tyrannies usurp power and use it in cruel ways. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/86 "2018-01-03T16:23:38Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > States rights was never used to justify slavery. I think we can just leave that there for all to see. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/87 "2018-01-07T01:28:53Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I think we can just leave that there for all to see. Yes that was the purpose of my posting the sentence. It hasn’t been refuted, or even challenged. Your post doesn’t change that. Unfortunately for you, your peculiar Constitutional Law theory is still displayed. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/88 "2018-01-07T05:48:39Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Yes that was the purpose of my posting the sentence. It hasn’t been refuted, or even challenged. Your post doesn’t change that. > > Unfortunately for you, your peculiar Constitutional Law theory is still displayed. > **[Slavery and States' Rights](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_and_States%27_Rights)** > > "Slavery and States' Rights" was a speech given by former Confederate States Army general Joseph Wheeler on July 31, 1894. The speech deals with the American Civil War and is considered to be a "Lost Cause" view of the war's causation. It is generally understood to argue that the United States (the Union) was to blame for the war, and downplays slavery as a cause. > The Richmond, Virginia Dispatch stated, "The House of Representatives being in Committee of the Whole, on appropriations and expendit... > **[For the last time, the American Civil War was not about states’ rights](https://qz.com/378533/for-the-last-time-the-american-civil-war-was-not-about-states-rights)** > > It was about money—specifically, the money to be lost by Southern titans of agribusiness should slavery be abolished at the federal level. [https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/states-rights-but-to-what/](https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/states-rights-but-to-what/) \*It’s true, then, that South Carolina seceded over states’ rights: though, as neo-confederates are loath to admit, the specific right in question concerned the ownership of human chattel. One of the South’s persistent complaints was the northern states would not vigorously cooperate in the return of fugitive slaves and that the free states allowed antislavery organizations to flourish. In other words, for South Carolina, slavery and states’ rights were not mutually exclusive; in fact, they were the same thing. Today too few people understand the intricate legal history that connects slavery to states’ rights — and as a result a needless debate continues, 150 years after secession began.\* ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/89 "2018-01-07T12:20:27Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > we can’t get rid of the Senate, short of abolishing the entire Constitution and starting over from scratch. We can’t even do it via amendment: It’s the one part of the Constitution that’s explicitly not subject to the amendment process. You’re referring to the language of Article V (which governs amending the Constitution) that “no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.” Unless there’s some hidden meaning in here that I can’t see, that means that each state must have the same number of voting Senators. That’s it. Could be one Senator per state, could be twenty. Probably can’t be zero (which abolishing the Senate entirely would accomplish) because you’d be depriving each state of its suffrage there altogether. However, the Constitution could be amended to turn the Senate into a House of Lords-type body with no role in actual legislation. There’s nothing that says the _role_ of the Senate can’t be amended, so long as each state still has the same number of Senators as every other state. Mind you, I wouldn’t want to see such an amendment until after another amendment was ratified that minimized the extent to which the House could be gerrymandered. As long as House districts can be drawn every which way, the Senate is a necessary check on the consequences of gerrymandering. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/90 "2018-01-07T13:18:44Z")
Which I also suggested, in the very next sentence after the one you quoted. On the matter of tyrannical governments: The state level is not the most tyrannical. Most local governments are even more so. But many conservatives aren’t even satisfied with that level of tyranny, and so create yet another level of government in the form of HOAs. On the matter of states’ rights: The fiction of states’ rights has indeed been used, many times, as a justification for the Civil War and for slavery. Such use was, of course, a lie, but that hasn’t stopped many people from telling it. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/91 "2018-01-07T14:47:35Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > States rights was never used to justify slavery. I want some of what you’re smoking. Have you ever read a book on the history of the United States? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/92 "2018-01-07T15:05:03Z")
Not to mention the Corwin Amendment to the Constitution, which was proposed specifically to make sure slavery could never be abolished. The text reads: No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State Yeah, I’m sure “domestic institutions of a state” has no relation whatever to “state’s rights.” That would just be insane! ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2018, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461/93 "2018-01-07T20:40:31Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Which I also suggested, in the very next sentence after the one you quoted. That’s what I get for skimming too fast. My apologies. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-repealing-the-17th-amendment/805461.md?page=4)