-
Quick Tour
Connect. Share. Learn.Welcome to ActiveRain, the #1 social community for real estate professionals.- Explore the world's largest storehouse of real estate knowledge
- Access free training on ActiveRain University
- Share the experience of life in the real estate industry
- Grow your business through real estate blogging
- Blogs
-
Resources
Product Reviews Curious as to what others in your profession think about a certain product or tool? AR's community takes the time to leave honest and transparent reviews of their experiences so you can be a bit wiser about your purchase.
- Broken down by categories and subcategories for easy finds
- Get an unfiltered look at what real users are saying
- Leave a review yourself for others to benefit from
- Add new products as you use them and gain points for doing so
|
;)
;)
;)
Find FL real estate agents and West Palm Beach real estate on ActiveRain.
Disclaimer: ActiveRain Corp. does not necessarily endorse the real estate agents, loan officers and brokers listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs and blog entries are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a house. ActiveRain Corp. takes no responsibility for the content in these profiles, that are written by the members of this community.
© 2013 ActiveRain Corp. All Rights Reserved
54 Comments on Our Founding Fathers Had A Better Idea
James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” openly admitted that the equal suffrage in the Senate was a compromise, a “lesser evil,” and not born out of any political theory.
Since 1789, the Senate has become much more malaportioned. At the time of the Connecticut Compromise, the largest state, Virginia, had only twelve times the population of the smallest state, Delaware. Today, the largest state, California, has a population that is seventy times greater than the population of the smallest state, Wyoming.
Karl,
It doesn't matter how large California is. It is 1/50 of the total. The Senate was created to represent the states on an equal basis and in doing so represent the interests of its citizens. Notice that their powers are more in keeping with this also. Like it or not this is still a federation of member states. :)
Steve
I would say that the smallest state needs to control the largest state from itself. Maybe the idea wasn't representation for all, equally, maybe it was to stop larger states from doing exactly what is happening today. The Senate is nothing more than a spending machine, it has no other purpose.
Dale,
When really it should have stopped health care, insisted the Attorney General enforce the immigration law, and other measures that affect the states. :)
Steve
I do think so Karl. They were worried about tyranny of all forms - majority and minority rule. Do you think they saw that a few illegal votes in a couple of states could swing a presidential election because of electoral votes? Or that so many electoral votes would be concentrated in so few states?
That's why Madison, Jay and Hamilton traveled around trying to convert people to the very IDEA of a Constitution, as such federal "power" was not trusted. That's the very reason for our Federalist Papers. The Anti-Federalist Papers are just as interesting. And Madison's #58 may answer your population question.
What they did NOT see, or would approve of, is the Senate's ability to do what the Constitution clearly does not want it to do - hold up the gubment as hostage to the Senate Majority Leader. That is shameful. And where did/does the Senate get budgetary authority? Or the ability to run the gubment with continuing resolutions for years so it does not have to put up numbers people would disagree with? Again, shameful. And illegal. They should ALL be removed.
Yes, but don't we now have a 'tyranny' of the small states over the majority of the population? The "power" of a voter in Montana is 70 times greater than the voter from California...is that right? Is that what Madison had in mind with the compromise?....I think not.
Jay,
You are right. All appropriations originate in the House - except when Harry Reid deems otherwise. :)
Steve
Karl,
The Senate is comprised correctly and so is the House - what a concept. In the Senate all states are equal - by design. :)
Steve
Seventy times the vote is a weird way to look at it. The idea was that each state had equal representation - each state votes the same as the others. California sure has more influence in presidential elections than Montana.
Jay,
The equal vote works for the states' interests and the proportional vote for the people. :)
Steve
California, as a state, may have 'more power' in a presidential election, but the California individual voter doesn't.
Karl,
Actually the voters do in this case. :)
Steve
I agree that popular election of Senators should be repealed and go back to the State Legislature. I wonder why they actually changed it back in 1913. My bet is that with all the civil rights of women wanting to vote that somehow that triggered this change but don't know for sure. The founding fathers were certainly not always wise and righteous - they allowed slavery, discrimination, and other abominations to happily take place - Jefferson & Washington both owned many slaves.
The reverse argument is that the legislature would simply appoint members of their own party to act as their puppet -kind of like the President does with judges and cabinet members - but the people electing a Senator will hold them much more accountable for their actions.
Another thought I keep thinking is the nonsense of Governors Rob Blogovich in Illinois and Charlie Crist in Florida regarding how they appointed Senators.
Rob,
The reason for the change in 1913 was Wilson and his progressive movement. If you argue that the Senators would be puppets of the legislature, how does the legislature get elected? From people that live in our communities. Look at how far removed Senators are from the people today and how close they are to the big money and their lobbyists. Definitely need to repel the 17th. Thanks. :)
Steve
Rob,
Your point underscores why the 17th needs to be repealed. Under the old plan the governors didn't appoint, the legislatures did - and there would be no need for placeholders since an election was not coming up. :)
Steve
Wilson? At least 29 States by 1912, one year before ratification and Wlson's inauguration, were nominating Senators on a popular basis, and, as a consequence, the constitutional discretion of the legislatures had been reduced to little more than that retained by presidential electors.
Karl,
The point is that the states still controlled the process. No longer so. :)
Steve
Wait a minute, you said and I quote; "The reason for the change in 1913 was Wilson..." I dispute that and now you say that the point is something else. Ok...whatever.
Karl,
The point always has been that the states controlled the process before the Amendment changed it. Had that still been true today, Obamacare would not have passed or would have been repealed. :)
Steve