The 17th Amendment Explained: The Constitution for Dummies Series
Summary
TLDRThis educational video from 'Hip Hughes History' dives into the 17th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, explaining its shift from state legislature-appointed senators to direct election by the people, enhancing democracy. It explores the amendment's history, from its proposal in 1823 to its ratification in 1913, driven by ideals of democracy and addressing corruption. The video also discusses the contemporary debate, with some arguing the amendment undermines federalism and the original balance of state and federal power, potentially leading to increased federal intervention.
Takeaways
- π The 17th Amendment is part of the U.S. Constitution that allows for the direct election of Senators by the people of each state.
- π³οΈ Prior to the 17th Amendment, Senators were chosen by state legislatures, which was seen as a form of indirect democracy.
- π The amendment also addresses the process for filling Senate vacancies, allowing for quicker representation in Congress.
- π The 17th Amendment was first proposed in 1823 and took nearly a century to be ratified, reflecting a growing desire for more democratic representation.
- π₯ The amendment was supported by various movements, including populism, which sought to give more power to the people.
- π¨ The Gilded Age was a period of perceived corruption in the Senate, with special interests allegedly buying influence through state legislatures.
- ποΈ The 17th Amendment was finally adopted in 1913 after 31 states had called for its consideration, avoiding a potential 'runaway convention'.
- π The immediate effect of the amendment was a shift in representation, with urban areas gaining more influence in the selection of Senators.
- π€ Some conservatives and those concerned with federalism oppose the 17th Amendment, arguing it undermines the balance of power between states and the federal government.
- ποΈ Critics of the amendment believe it has led to an increase in federal intervention and growth, moving away from the original intent of the Senate as a stabilizing force.
- π There is also a debate about whether the 17th Amendment violates the Constitution's amendment procedure by altering the 'equal suffrage' of states without their consent.
Q & A
What is the 17th Amendment to the United States Constitution?
-The 17th Amendment changed the way Senators are elected. Originally, Senators were chosen by state legislatures. The 17th Amendment allows for Senators to be elected directly by the people of each state.
What was the original method of electing Senators as stated in the Constitution?
-According to the original Constitution, Senators were elected by the state legislatures, not directly by the people.
How does the 17th Amendment address the issue of Senate vacancies?
-The 17th Amendment allows the state's executive authority to issue writs of election to fill Senate vacancies, with the possibility for the state legislature to empower the executive to make temporary appointments until an election can be held.
What was the historical context for the proposal of the 17th Amendment?
-The 17th Amendment was first proposed in 1823 as a response to the perceived corruption in the Senate and the idea that it represented special interests rather than the people.
Who were some of the early supporters of the 17th Amendment?
-Early supporters included President Andrew Johnson, who was a big supporter of the amendment, and the Populist movement of the late 1800s, which sought to expand democracy.
What was the significance of the 1892 Omaha Platform in relation to the 17th Amendment?
-The 1892 Omaha Platform, adopted by the Populist Party, included the idea of the 17th Amendment, indicating a growing movement towards direct democracy in Senate elections.
Why was there opposition to the 17th Amendment among some conservatives and those concerned with federalism?
-Opponents of the 17th Amendment argue that it disrupts the balance of power between the federal government and the states, potentially leading to more federal intervention and growth, and that it may violate the Constitution's requirement for equal suffrage of the states.
What was the immediate effect of the 17th Amendment on the representation in the Senate?
-The immediate effect was a shift in representation, with some states experiencing a loss of Republican representation as urban votes became louder due to direct democracy.
How does the 17th Amendment relate to the concept of federalism?
-The 17th Amendment is seen by some as a departure from the original federalist design of the Constitution, where the Senate was intended to represent the interests of the states, chosen by state legislatures, rather than the national interests represented by direct elections.
What is the argument against the 17th Amendment in terms of the Senate's role as a 'break pedal' to the House's 'gas pedal'?
-Critics argue that the Senate was intended to provide a more deliberative and stable counterbalance to the House, representing local state interests. Direct elections, they argue, make Senators more responsive to national issues and potentially reduce their role as a moderating force.
What was the process that led to the ratification of the 17th Amendment?
-The 17th Amendment was proposed in response to growing public demand and was eventually ratified in 1913 after 31 states had asked the federal government to consider it, avoiding the need for a runaway convention.
Outlines
π Introduction to the 17th Amendment
The script begins with an introduction to the 17th Amendment, part of the 'Constitution for Dummies' series. It aims to educate viewers on the amendment's text and its implications for direct democracy in the Senate elections. The amendment changed the way Senators are elected, shifting from state legislatures to direct popular vote, and altered the process for filling Senate vacancies. The host uses humor and mnemonic devices to aid understanding, setting the stage for a deeper dive into the amendment's history and significance.
π³οΈ History and Impact of the 17th Amendment
This paragraph delves into the historical context and impact of the 17th Amendment. Initially proposed in 1823, it gained support as an ideal of democracy, addressing corruption and the elite control of the Senate. The amendment was eventually ratified in 1913 after a push from populist movements and states that had already adopted direct primaries for Senators. The script discusses the immediate effects of the amendment, such as a shift in representation and a potential increase in federal power, leading to more progressivism. It also touches on the opposition to the amendment, particularly from those who view it as an infringement on federalism and the original intent of the Constitution.
π‘οΈ Opposition and Constitutional Concerns
The final paragraph addresses the opposition to the 17th Amendment, focusing on arguments from conservatives and those concerned with federalism. Critics argue that the amendment undermines the balance of power between the federal and state governments, as the Senate was intended to represent state interests rather than national ones. They contend that the amendment leads to a nationalization of issues and an expansion of federal intervention. Additionally, some opponents claim the amendment violates the Constitution's amendment procedure by altering the 'equal suffrage' of states without their consent. The script concludes with a call to action for viewers to explore the 'Constitution for Dummies' playlist and subscribe to the channel for more educational content.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘17th Amendment
π‘Direct Democracy
π‘State Legislatures
π‘Vacancies
π‘Populism
π‘Gerrymandering
π‘Federalism
π‘Progressivism
π‘Opposition
π‘Supremacy Clause
π‘Runaway Convention
Highlights
Introduction to the 17th Amendment and its significance in the Constitution.
Explanation of the 17th Amendment's text and its direct democracy implications for the Senate.
Clarification on how the 17th Amendment changes the election of Senators from state legislature selection to popular vote.
Discussion on the amendment's impact on filling Senate vacancies more efficiently.
Historical context of the 17th Amendment's proposal and support since 1823.
Connection between the 17th Amendment and the populist movement of the late 1800s.
The role of President Andrew Johnson in supporting the 17th Amendment.
The influence of William Jennings Bryan on the push for the 17th Amendment.
Illustration of the perceived corruption in the Senate prior to the 17th Amendment.
The urgency to pass the 17th Amendment to prevent a potential runaway convention.
The quick ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913 with minimal opposition.
Immediate effects of the 17th Amendment on political representation and progressivism.
Critique of the 17th Amendment from a federalism perspective and its impact on state representation.
Argument that the 17th Amendment may lead to increased federal intervention and growth.
Opposition's view that the 17th Amendment violates the Constitution's amendment procedure and equal suffrage.
Summary of the ideological battle surrounding the 17th Amendment and its implications for democracy and federalism.
Encouragement for viewers to explore the Constitution for Dummies playlist for further learning.
Invitation to subscribe to Hip Hughes History for more educational content.
Transcripts
[Music]
hey guys welcome to hip Hughes history
watch out 17th Amendment I'm coming to
get you as we continue with the
Constitution for dummy series taking a
look at the words and the meaning of the
Constitution so wherever you stand on
the issues of the day you stand smart or
maybe you're just studying for an exam I
don't really care all I know is I'm
about to do some teaching and if you
hang out you'll do some learning so gy
up here we
[Music]
all right let's take a look at the words
of the 17th Amendment and then we can
break it down orchestra music the Senate
of the United States shall be composed
of two senators from each state elected
by the people thereof for 6 years and
each Senator shall have one vote the
electors in each state shall have the
qualifications requisite for electors of
the most numerous branch of the state
legislatures when vacancies tap in in
the representation of any state in the
Senate the executive authority of such
State shall issue rits of election to
fill such vacancies provided that the
legislature of any state may empower the
executive thereof to make temporary
appointments until the people fill the
vacancies by election as the legislature
may direct this amendment shall not be
construed as to affect the election or
term of any Senator chosen before it
becomes valid as part of the
Constitution
so the words itself guys um in its most
basic form is direct democracy for the
Senate if you're having trouble
remembering numbers just spell the
number 17 this is so stupid seev right
just stop it with the SE and at least
you'll get to the issue of the Senate
but um I'm much more interested in the
meaning so what this basically is going
to change is Article 1 Section 3 Clause
1 of the United States Constitution in
the original Constitution the Senate
which is kind of the representation of
states in the Congress and really a
benefactor to the small states because
each state gets two rather than having
the state legislatur choose those
Senators which was the way up to
1913 the people of that state by popular
vote by democracy will choose it so in a
sense we're moving from indirect
democracy because the people chose the
state legislator I guess to direct
democracy Now the second part of the
17th Amendment also changes the way that
vacancies are dealt with in the original
Constitution if there was a vacancy the
state legislature had to choose the new
appointment and there could be a great
lapse of time in there so the thought
was maybe we should direct away so if
there's a vacancy it gets filled really
quick so the state doesn't lose its
representation in Congress so therefore
it gives the state legislator the
authority to give the governor the
ability to direct that to pick some
somebody until the legislature schedules
a new election so it could be popular
vote again still sticking to that
original direct democracy so that's the
17th Amendment right direct democracy
for the people and the vacancy issue so
let's take a look at the history history
where are
[Music]
you so the 17th amendment was first
proposed in 1823 and um it garnered
support as kind of this kind of ideal of
democracy that America is about
expanding democracy so why not expand it
to the Senate and certainly the
underlying issues were corruption for
many and the idea that the Senate was
kind of the elite branch of government
that they were the special interest
branch that basically bought their seats
from State legislatures Andrew Johnson
president after Abraham Lincoln was a
big supporter of the 17th Amendment um
and then as we get to the end of the
1800s we really see the birth of
populism and po ism is kind of a
people's movement to kind of Garner more
power for democracy we see this in state
initiatives and referendums the direct
primary and I believe there were upwards
of 10 or 15 states that already had
Direct primaries for senators in that
state so in a sense the state legislator
were only given a candidate from each
party that they could choose from so
this movement towards democracy is kind
of steamrolling towards the senate in
1892 the popular party in their Omaha
platform adopted this idea of the 17th
Amendment and the idea keeps going it
was William Jennings bran right of the
uh Scopes trial and he ran for president
as a Democrat as a populist kind of a
man of the people he was a big Pusher
for the 17th Amendment and again the
issue was kind of corruption this is the
Heyday of the Gilded Age and if you look
at the cartoon you can see the cartoon
right there the concept is the Senate is
being controlled by these special
interests by these um you know Monopoly
and steel companies and Oil Barons that
have the money in their pockets to kind
of buy Senators through the state
legislatures there was also this issue
of kind of confusion when there was a
vacancy the Constitution directed that
the state legislature would just choose
the new nominee the new Senator but a
lot of times there's a lot of bickering
and fighting and there would be
vacancies for months and months in the
Senate so that's why that second part
kind of deals with the idea of filling
that vacancy really quickly so by 1912
31 States had already asked uh the
federal government to consider the 17th
Amendment and there was kind of a fear I
think from Congress that if they didn't
do anything it would be a runaway
convention so if you look at Article 5
of The Constitution you don't even need
the federal government you can bypass
the federal government if you get 2third
of the states to kind of call for an
amendment at a at a convention and then
34s of the states to agree you could
just say screw you federal government
we're going to do it anyway so the
federal government I think is worried
about this kind of runaway con vention
idea so they settle down and by 1913
they bang out the 17th Amendment and uh
there's really little opposition there
was only a few states that voted against
it so now we have it um immediately we
see effects um immediately we see a lot
of loss of Republican representation um
in some states not all states uh
representation is not equal in their
state legislatures they have kind of
gerrymandering schemes going on where
rural districts are being being over
represented in the state legislatures so
those rural interests are being um you
know basically given power to choose
their senators and now when you go to
direct democracy that Urban vote that
Progressive or more populist vote is
going to be louder so there's definitely
an effect the effect is going to be more
progressivism the effect is going to be
in a sense a larger share of power for
the federal government which brings us
right up against the roof of the
opposition opposition I'm against
now all right so let's take a look at
kind of the opposition to the 17th
Amendment which exists today amongst um
some conservatives and tea party members
and people that see this as an issue in
federalism so shout out to my brother
Lowry by the way so if we look at
federalism right I'm going to grab a
piece of paper here now the basic
concept um the founders had was that you
know power would be shared um in a sense
kind of like that where there's a little
bit more power here given to the federal
government and that would be article six
of the Constitution the supremacy clause
that the federal government is the law
of the land but then there's all these
other mechanisms like the 10th Amendment
and checks and balances um to make sure
that that power is limited to that piece
of paper so in a sense when we look at
Congress when we look at the Connecticut
Compromise the Great Compromise that put
together Congress the idea the basic
idea is that the federal government is
kind of represented by the people
through the house of representation
because that's direct democracy and the
Senate is in a sense the home of the
states because the state legislators
choose them so together they form they
together they come
together and they make the federal
government so the opposition to the 17th
Amendment basically says is you're
taking away this piece of paper from the
formula in a sense what you're doing is
you're robbing that state legislature
that state voice of their rightful
position in Congress and you're
basically throwing it to the people
which becomes there's a couple arguments
against that one of them is that that
was never the intention that democracy
in a sense can be a bad thing mob rule
factions loud voices they're temporary
and they change quickly the Senate
wasn't supposed to be like that they
would say the Senate was supposed to be
kind of like the wise people on the hill
that would say chill people this is the
Constitution right way to move forward
and representing their local interest of
their states they would in a sense be
the break pedal to the gas pedal that
the house held so the argument is once
you change that formula and you make
everything nationalized so when you're
running for Senate you're not running on
local issues so much you're not saying
you know elect me because I'm going to
deal with this issue down state or
Upstate you might say some of that but
you're mostly being asked about National
issues about um you know the the economy
and foreign policy and these big big
issues which means that you're
representing not the state as much as
the federal government and then we're
going to see according to this argument
more Federal intervention more Federal
growth right and there's people that are
for that people say that that's
necessary sometimes because the states
aren't dealing with issues we need the
federal government and then of course
that other side is going to be that's
tyranny and bang bang you have your
ideological battle another argument is
that this is actually in violation of
another part of the Constitution um
people are opponents of the 17th
Amendment point to the fifth article of
the Constitution the amendment procedure
itself the formula's gone through about
how to amend the Constitution there's
actually kind of a little part at the
end there that says don't mess with
equal suffrage of the states and the sen
don't you mess with that without the
state's consent so there's that argument
that some states have not given the
consent to the 17th Amendment so
therefore that disallows this idea that
we're taking away their equal suffrage
there's people that would say you still
have your equal suffrage but the formula
is different it's direct democracy
against indirect
[Music]
democracy
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
so there you go guys that's the 17th
Amendment check it off the list and if
you haven't check the list out that
would be the playlist the Constitution
for dummies so if you click my chinny
chin chin I promise you you'll be gone
off to that playlist and be learning
like a bandit and if you haven't checked
out hip Hughes history and subscribed
you can do that by clicking my moving
hand that's right click the moving hand
and subscribe to hipu history it's like
magic all right guys so glad to do the
teaching we hope you did a little bit of
the learning where attention goes energy
flows we'll see you next
[Music]
time la la la la la
Browse More Related Video
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/nW12YrTqpU4/hq720.jpg)
Australian Federalism
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XfS-bZ69p0E/hq720.jpg)
Walkthrough of the Constitution | Constitution 101
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YExJVjuoS2c/hq720.jpg)
The Messy Articles of Confederation | Power and Politics in US Government 4 of 30 | Study Hall
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mNtWTdQbrng/hq720.jpg)
FEDERALISM Explained [AP Government Review]
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wvtdJa_e7dA/hq720.jpg)
Expanding DEMOCRACY [APUSH Review Unit 4 Topic 7] Period 4: 1800-1848 (Re-Upload)
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/J0gosGXSgsI/hq720.jpg)
Federalism: Crash Course Government and Politics #4
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)