What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

Also water related (and likely to be passed thanks to Wisconsin and the EPA not giving any sh**s about the environment), Foxconn (three months ago) asked the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for a waiver that allows them to divert seven million gallons of fresh Lake Michigan water into their new plant PER DAY.
Under the Great Lakes Compact, all water diverted from Lake Michigan must be returned minus what’s lost to evaporation or what’s used for Foxconn’s manufacturing process. The city’s application estimates about 2.7 million gallons per day will be consumed and wouldn’t return to the lake. All wastewater would return to the Racine wastewater treatment plan and then the lake. Foxconn has struggled with pollution problems in China.
Click to expand...
(emphasis mine)
 
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

aparch said:
Also water related (and likely to be passed thanks to Wisconsin and the EPA not giving any sh**s about the environment), Foxconn (three months ago) asked the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for a waiver that allows them to divert seven million gallons of fresh Lake Michigan water into their new plant PER DAY.

(emphasis mine)
Click to expand...

This volume isn’t uncommon in industry. And in fact, the water coming out of the plant I worked at was cleaner than the water in the river.
 
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

From a FB post today:
On this day in 1913, the 17th Amendment is ratified. For the first time in American history, voters would be able to directly elect their United States Senators. The decision seems like a no-brainer. Shouldn’t the people get to elect their own Senators?

Unfortunately, the amendment had many unintended consequences.

Originally, the Constitution provided that state legislatures should select U.S. Senators. Imagine that you do not get to vote for your Senator. Instead, you know that you will elect your state legislators, then THEY will choose someone to represent your state in the United States Senate. Early Americans lived this way, and they began to want something more democratic.

“The thing we do want,” Senator Albert J. Beveridge said at the time, “the thing upon which the people are determined, the thing which they ought to have . . . is a right of the people to elect their Senators themselves.” Any other position, Beveridge concluded, stems from a “profound distrust of the people” and should not be tolerated in a democracy.

Unfortunately, his statement reflected a deep misunderstanding of our founding principles. The Founders were never trying to create a *pure* democracy. Instead, they created a republic, complete with separation of powers, checks and balances, and other safeguards for liberty. The senatorial election process was one of these safeguards.

The Senate was created to serve a different function than the House of Representatives. The House is a purely democratic body with “one person, one vote” representation. The Senate was intended to be a more republican, deliberative body with “one state, one vote” representation. The House gives the people a voice. The Senate was supposed to give the states a voice.

Nevertheless, the 17th Amendment was passed, and it had a lot of support. Only 191 legislators *nationwide* opposed ratification—152 of those votes came from Vermont and Connecticut! Most state legislatures unanimously supported the change. Besides the concern about being “more democratic,” people were upset about legislative stalemates in the selection process for Senators. In one extreme example, a stalemate prevented Delaware from having a U.S. Senator for four years at the turn of the century. Some people were also concerned that their state legislators were open to bribery.

But if your state legislator is open to bribery in one area, why wouldn’t he be in other areas? And why would you keep electing him?

Ratification of the 17th Amendment has had many unforeseen consequences.

The original constitutional provision made Senators accountable to state legislatures for their votes. The states themselves, as sovereign entities, had a voice in the federal legislative process. They could defend themselves from encroachments upon their power or from mandates put upon them by a federal government quick to make promises but slow to fund them. But the 17th Amendment, as Senator Zell Miller noted in 2004, “was the death of the careful balance between State and Federal Government. . . . Today State governments have to stand in line because they are just another one of the many special interests that try to get Senators to listen to them, and they are at an extreme disadvantage because they have no PAC.”

Since 1913, the federal government has obviously seen a great increase in its size, cost and power. You have to wonder what it would look like today if the 17th Amendment had never been passed.

---------------
If you enjoy these history posts, please know that it is important to LIK E, SHAR E & C OMMENT. This site’s algorithm will weed these posts out of your newsfeed if you do not interact with them. (I don’t make the rules! Just following them.) ;)

Gentle reminder: History posts are copyright © 2013-2018 by Tara Ross. I appreciate it when you use the Facebook “share” feature instead of cutting/pasting.

Permalink: http://www.taraross.com/2018/04/this-day-in-history-17th-amendment

#TDIH #OTD #AmericanHistory #USHistory #liberty #freedom #ShareTheHistory
Click to expand...
 
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

The expansion of the federal government since 1913 had a lot more to do with two World Wars and a depression than letting the people elect Senators.
 
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

Power to the People, no delay!

I love that the cons hate direct election of Senators. Talk about a little too on the nose.
 
Kepler said:
Power to the People, no delay!

I love that the cons hate direct election of Senators. Talk about a little too on the nose.
Click to expand...

Senators, according to JFK, were supposed to be ambassadors from the State to the Federal establishment. Are they or are they now creatures of K Street?
 
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

joecct said:
Senators, according to JFK, were supposed to be ambassadors from the State to the Federal establishment. Are they or are they now creatures of K Street?
Click to expand...

Stahp. We know you guys hate democracy.
 
Re: The States: Doing Their Own Thing...

Take all the money out of politics and I'll listen to letting the states pick the Senators. Your wish to go back is asking to have the Koch brothers buy the Senate through the state legislatures they already have and instantly call for a Constitutional convention.

Not only no, but **** no. Stop trying to change the rules because your ideas can't win in the marketplace of ideas.
 
bronconick said:
Take all the money out of politics and I'll listen to letting the states pick the Senators. Your wish to go back is asking to have the Koch brothers buy the Senate through the state legislatures they already have and instantly call for a Constitutional convention.

Not only no, but **** no. Stop trying to change the rules because your ideas can't win in the marketplace of ideas.
Click to expand...

Soros and Steyer are buying the other side, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top