Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Hey Pete's avatar

Good points, but the abolition argument is stronger

Laird’s position boils down to 17a being kept on the merits that it minimizes the distance between populist sentiment and real levers of power, theoretically allowing based populists to be railroaded into the Senate without the interference of pesky state legislatures. If only the right demagogues come around, industrial democracy will pave the way for easy political wins because the vibes are in our favor.

While this recognizes the need to deal with the system we have and not the one we ought to, it only offsets the wishlist-ing by admitting the need for (and lack of) these hypothetical populists to actually do this. The examples produced via 17a are in your own words either disappointing failures or bad actors. Products of their state-level parties and legislatures they may be, the fact remains that 17a is (presently) not used in a meaningful capacity to channel right-wing populism.

This also seems to imply that it would be easier to hold and wield power without dealing with state govts, or that the student council/ Model UN types they are populated with are an insurmountable obstacle better ignored or by-passed. At some point, control needs to be wrested from them if authentic and lasting success is to be achieved. There is only so much that can be done without the cooperation of lower levels of government, as the current administration is making clear.

Overall cool format, excited for more

Expand full comment
IceFl4re -'s avatar

I say abolish.

Honestly:

1. The question on federalism vs unitary is already kind of irrelevant at this point.

Federalism vs unitary nowadays is just a question of legitimacy of subnational.

Is the subnational sovereign on its own right, legitimacy wise?

Like, are the subdivisions are given by the central government, or are the subdivision rise from the bottom up and central govt has to pay attention to them?

Look: Spain today is a unitary state, but Spanish province has more autonomy than US states.

2. If you want the States to have max rights, get rid of the political parties. Yes, really - Senators have to be non-partisan.

3. In fact we require a massive constitutional amendment, not just a question of 17th amendment.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts