Right now, incumbent Suzanne Kosmas is pushing audio of Adams supporting repeal of the 17th Amendment and going back to letting statehouses choose U.S. Senators. I am curious what Marco Rubio thinks of that idea.
So do you enjoy voting in Senate elections? Since we have arguably the hottest such race in the country, I would think voters right now would be especially suspicious of this sort of constitutional repeal.
And once again, I'd like to note that Republicans, supposed defenders of the Constitution, seem to have a lot of things they want repealed. Birthright citizenship. Federal Income Tax. The list goes on and on.
I wrote yesterday that this race may be slipping away from us. If Kosmas can fight back, though, and paint her opponent as an extremist, then we can defend the 24th from attack. Adams was part of a crowded primary field, and emerged victorious when many early on were predicting rich steakhouse man Craig Miller would be the nominee. But outside of the few thousand (OK, almost 20,000) who voted for her on Aug. 24, she is largely an unknown quantity.
Let's hope Kosmas writes Adams' story before Adams does.
Wanting to change the Constitution is not the same thing as not supporting the constitution, so quit pretending that it is. The US Constitution has been amended on several occasions. There are several changes I would make to the Constitution as undoubtedly would you
ReplyDeleteI would not change the concept that children born in the good old USA are born as citizens. It is as good a standard as any.
I would, however, send the parents here illegally packing, giving them the choice to take their child with them or leave it here for adoption or with a relative of the child who is here legally. That seems to be a reasonable compromise
Rather than have Kosmas "write the story" about Sandy Adams, I would rather have the truth about both candidates, whatever that truth may be. There is much to like (and dislike) about both candidates
I should note that given the quality of the US Senators elected by direct election, we could hardly do worse by reverting back to the prior method of electing US Senators. The concern of the founding fathers was that direct election would lead to selection due to demagoguery - we've clearly seen that happen, both left and right
ReplyDeleteYour suggestion on sending illegal parents packing really has nothing to do with changing the constitution. And I am honestly not sure there is much I or many other liberals would repeal from the Constitution. I'd rather add some stuff. But if I think about it, I'm sure there would be something.
ReplyDeleteThe Founding Fathers dealt with a population that had no mass media and had to rely on news from Washington getting back home on horseback weeks later. While there are moments when we probably all have doubts about the fickle electorate, voters are informed enough to make solid choices without the help of state lawmakers holding their hands.
Also, Florida for most of the past 20 years has had Senators from separate parties. The only exception was a four-year period when Bob Graham and Bill Nelson served together. But with state lawmakers choosing Senators that would surely not be the case. While I always root for the Democrat in a Senate contest, I have always seen some wisdom on the part of voters in retaining a voice on both sides of the aisle. That option is off the table when lawmakers start calling the shots themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe reason for Senators being appointed by the legislature was so that the state has representation. If a majority of the legislature is from one party, that is because We The People made the choice. Two Senators from that party would clearly represent the desires of the people.
ReplyDelete