A Discussion About the Fourteenth and Seventeenth.

Yesterday's post was cross posted at http://www.hammeroftruth.com/.  First off, thank you to the folks at Hammer of Truth for allowing me to cross post to you site.  I should also like to thank P, for commenting on that post.  He brought up a point, which I believe merits some discussion.  His belief, is that Joe Biden wishes to dispense with troublesome debate about the fourteenth and Seventeenth amendments due to their vital roles in today's American fabric.  P posits that these two additions to our Constitution are so important than Biden is correct in dismissing out of hand the crazy talk of having them repealed.  Fair enough.  I shall now destroy this notion.

First the Fourteenth, which follows here:

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratifi ed July 9, 1868.

(Note: Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution was modifi ed by

Section 2 of the 14th Amendment.)

SECTION 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and

subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United

States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall

make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges

or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall

any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,

without due process of law; nor deny to any person within

its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

SECTION 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several

States according to their respective numbers, counting the

whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians

not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for

the choice of electors for President and Vice President of

the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive

and Judicial offi cers of a State, or the members of the

Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants

of such State, [being twenty-one years of age,]* and

citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except

for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of

representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion

which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the

whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in

such State.

SECTION 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress,

or elector of President and Vice President, or hold

any offi ce, civil or military, under the United States, or

under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a

member of Congress, or as an offi cer of the United States,

or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive

or judicial offi cer of any State, to support the Constitution

of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or

rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the

enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds

of each House, remove such disability.

SECTION 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized

by law, including debts incurred for payment of

pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection

or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the

United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt

or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion

against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation

of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and

claims shall be held illegal and void.

SECTION 5.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate

legislation, the provisions of this article.

*Changed by Section 1 of the 26th Amendment.

13


This amendment was added to the Constitution immediately after the Civil War as a direct remedy to what the southern states were trying to do to abridge the rights of former slaves.  The amendment has 5 sections.  Section 1 states that anyone born in the territory of the United States was henceforth a U.S. citizen.  The sole purpose of this was to keep former slave owners from denying former slaves citizenship, and all of the rights and protections therein.  This is also the section which gave us the concept of anchor babies about a hundred years later.  This is the reason that a lot of conservative groups are for repealing this amendment.  The practice of illegal aliens crossing the border illegally during the 39th week of pregnancy in order to have their children be able to claim citizenship is well beyond what the authors of this amendment had in mind for us, 150 years later.  whether or not a person agrees or disagrees with repealing this amendment, there are two things any thinking person would have to agree to.  One, discussion of the amendment is at least not just a crazy waste of time.  Two, an amendment added specifically for the purposes of post Civil War reconstruction, has lost some of its usefulness, just because we are 150 years past the Civil War.  There are no longer any former slaves living today, there are no longer former officers in the Confederate Army who could possibly run for public office, There are no longer any Confederate Bonds which have been sold to foreign governments for the United States to deny payment on.  P's assertion that this amendment was vital to the continuation of the USA is just plain silly.


On to the Seventeenth, which is more complicated of an issue.  It requires a serious discussion of the direction we want to take our country.  That discussion is necessary, but I am angered by a Vice President of the United States who considers people who want to hold that discussion as being ignorant cranks. 

Read the Seventeenth here:

AmendmentXVII.

Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratifi ed April 8, 1913.

(Note: Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution was modifi ed 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 qualifi cations 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 fi ll such vacancies: Provided, That

the legislature of any State may empower the executive

thereof to make temporary appointments until the people

fi ll 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.

It is important to note that the original mandate for how Senators were picked.  Senators were originally chosen by how each individual State Constitution provided.  Most State Legislatures and or Governors chose the Senators without holding direct State elections.  The reasoning for this was as follows.  The Senator's mandate was to be the voices of individual States in the business of Federal Governance.  The direct representatives of the people was with the House of Representatives.  The Federal Government was checked in its power by the formation of the Senate.  Ohio, for example, had a voice in the formation of Federal Legislation which the State of Ohio might find infringed on Ohio's rights as a State.  By removing the voice of individual States, we have effectively removed the ability of individual States to be a check on the size, power, and scope of the Federal Government.  As evidence of this, you need look no further than the last 90 years.  As for me, I actually agree with repeal of the Seventeenth.  I believe that a check on the Federal Government's ability to mandate itself more authority, size, scope is sorely needed.  This amendment, more than anything ever legislated in this country has done more damage to our rights and protections guaranteed by our Founding Fathers.  Calling me crazy for believing this is avoiding the debate, which I believe Joe Biden is probably afraid of losing.
UPDATE:  I have heard some pushback that the 14th Amendment extends the Bill of Rights to the States.  That somehow, the rights guaranteed under these Amendments only applied to the Federal Government prior to the 14th.  This is of courst preposterous.  Putting asside the fact that there is not one single case of these Amendments being ignored by any court in the land prior to the Civil War Reconstruction, Article VI also addresses this argument.  Article VI follows:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before

the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against

the United States under this Constitution, as under the

Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States

which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties

made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the

United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and

the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing

in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary

notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and

the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive

and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of

the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation,

to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever

be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust

under the United States.

Article. VI.

AmendmentXIV.