We have to face the fact that the checks and balances system set up by the founding fathers has failed us completely ... it's a great system, but they never imagined that sheer ignorance would sweep across Washington, D.C. through the sacred halls of Congress, the Supreme Court and the White House. If the Obama Administration and Congress are not ignorant, then each person pursuing the destruction of the Constitution is committing wholesale treason in the direct violation of their oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution.
When we look to see where things might have began to go wrong we can look directly to the 17th Amendment:
Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratified April 8, 1913.
Note: Article I, section 3, of the Constitution was modified by the 17th 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.So let's take a look at what is precisely wrong with the 17th Amendment. From a blog entitled The Campaign to Restore Federalism, which Brad Daw pointed me in the direction of, I found an interesting, and extremely informative, post called:
Begin by Repealing the 17th Amendment
16 April 2009
One of the fundamental presumptions of the U.S. Constitution is this: when governmental power is consolidated and unchecked it is unresponsive to the needs of the governed and limits an individual’s ability to live freely. The framers originally sought to prevent the overreach of government by creating an elegant framework to distribute power as widely as possible through a structured competition of natural self-interests. It is for this reason that the framers preserved the integrity of the states, these independent but united “laboratories of democracy”, and it is this federal system that the 17th Amendment (which provides for the direct, popular election of U.S. Senators) destroyed. This amendment has resulted in, as the framers predicted, an authoritative national government with influence, power and control unchecked by any political mechanism. This domination threatens the uniquely American way of life and the solvency of the national government. ~ More
The executive director of The Campaign to Restore Federalism is a university professor in Atlanta, Georgia. He speaks to groups and media in support of this educational effort. You may contact The Campaign by writing to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Brad pointed me to another article that is very interesting, although I could have done without the Abraham Lincoln bashing and support of Ron Paul.
Repeal the 17th Amendment
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Every once in a blue moon someone in Congress (usually Congressman Ron Paul of Texas) proposes a law or resolution that would actually improve the prospects for human liberty and prosperity. It’s rare, but not nonexistent. One such case is Senate Joint Resolution 35, introduced into the U.S. Senate on April 28, 2004, which was recently brought to my attention by Laurence Vance.
S.J. Res. 35 reads: "Resolved . . . . The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed." That’s Section 1. Section 2 reads that "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years . . ."
This was the original design of the founding fathers; U.S. senators were not directly elected by the voting public until 1914. Thus, S.J. Res. 35 proposes a return to founding principles and is therefore a most revolutionary idea. A good overview of the history of the Seventeenth Amendment is Ralph A. Rossum’s book, Federalism, the Supreme Court, and the Seventeenth Amendment. Rossum correctly points out that the system of federalism or "divided sovereignty" that the founding fathers created with the Constitution was never intended to be enforced by the Supreme Court alone. Congress, the president, and most importantly, the citizens of the states, were also to have an equal say on constitutional matters. ~ More
And so, it is clear that this is one course of action we must take in our goal to Take America Back from the those who are systematically destroying it.
So yeah, it's time to seriously start the examination into the repealing of the 17th Amendment nationwide. It's time to stand up and be heard. It's time to make sure Washington D.C. understands that we are millions strong and we will not go away. When was the last time you called your state and U.S. legislators and said, "I'm calling to object..."
And as a quick aside: Should Barack Obama prove to have not been born in the U.S. or have surrendered his citizenship when he lived and attended school in Indonesia, then every executive order and piece of legislation he has signed into law is null and void. Huh, reverse every bit of damage he and congress have done to the Constitution and the American people in one fell swoop.
Interestingly, instead of offering up irrefutable proof of his citizenship he hired a high powered law firm to get every case thrown out of court on the grounds that we as American citizens do not have a vested interest in the outcome. Really? No vested interest?
Hey Obama, I have simple solution to this problem that is growing daily instead of going away! Produce a valid birth certificate instead of the silly one you posted on your campaign site.