Fascinating Washington Post piece: Constitutional Amendment for specials?

The Washington Post has an interesting letter from the Executive Director of Fairvote: We Need a Constitutional Amendment for Special Elections.

Of course the short answer is, yes we do.  Literally, without an Amendment, our Constitution vested power in states to set their own election rules, and most of all, their own schedules. Anyone who has been in Mississippi or South Carolina during a June or August primary is probably very much in favor of a Constitutional Amendment that would ban such madness.   But seriously, the founders gave the states the power to set their own rules.  Why?  Because they are states.  They are independent sovereigns that have reserved powers to determine how and when to send elected officials to represent them in Washington.  Imagine that gruesome collection of Senators in the federation in the equally gruesome last three Star Wars movies.  See, all those folks were sent to the Senate on the terms and proclivities on each planet.  Sure, I know, strange example.  But its “more red than the ivory tower.”  Ultimately the founders made a choice as to what the ground rules are on this issue.  And the states get to decide how to send Senators to Washington because the states were given that power, not Washington.   In this era, with distrust of Washington at an all time high, I very much doubt most Americans want even more power to write the rules taken from the states and given to Washington D.C.

One thought on “Fascinating Washington Post piece: Constitutional Amendment for specials?

  1. Elaine

    I agree with you 100%.

    But I wish the founders would have put term limits as a foundation to help avoid corruption and cronyism that seems to increase.

    What are your thoughts on term limits?

Comments are closed.