Nicole Scherzinger Nipple Slip Pic> Pornostars Francaise Celebrity sex clip; Pozer 3d HentaiRbd Gay Chavez Health And Safety On Construction Sites — lick my - Download The Sims 2 Full VersionHttp:// texas rebels escorts. extreme cunnilingus

Yellow with black
kingdom hearts ii limited edition strategy guide - Twin nudes amateur Juegosonline gratis.
gay luca
delicious free recipes.
Women in sexy seethrough pj's
montmartre nude
hentai doujinshi rumble roses
Free adult bachelorette games - tall flat blondesg spot rabbit vibrator -
Tombraider animated sex
decaf loose leaf tea; Http:// anime girls feet --


Repeal the seventeenth amendment?

I don’t know what to think about this proposal. Neither does Glenn Reynolds, who writes:

You want to think that anything would be an improvement over what we’ve got now, but heck, that’s probably what people thought when we ratified the Seventeenth Amendment

He wonders if making US Senators ineligible to run for President might not be a decent idea, and I wonder if he might not be on to something.

Not on something. On TO something.


  1. How about repealing the 16th Amendment first? While we are at it, we should add, ‘We really meant it!’ to the end of the 2nd and 10th Amendments.

  2. I’d vote no to repealing the 17th. Repealing it would concentrate more power for which ever politcal party is in control, leading only to greater corruption. The American public needs more & better direct representation, not less.

  3. Sam, ironically, the Senate is the most representative of houses. So far, no one has figured a way to gerrymander an entire state. So with all the rotten boroughs, safe districts and tortured congressional districts in the House, the Senate is more ‘democratic.’ Changing the method of appointment/election to the senate would not likely have much effect on the corruption level. But senators appointed by the states would have a different perspective on federal power – especially when they can be removed by their home state. It’s not a bad idea, but we’re not going to see it change anytime soon.

  4. BH, the reason the Senate is more representative, is because it is not locked in by gerrymandered districts. If, as I assume, the Gerrymandered, party-locked, legislatures choose senators, then the senators will become less representative becuase of the gerrymander-defined orientation of the legislature. There would be a similar issue if the Governors chose the senators too. Fix Gerrymandering first, then we’ll talk about the Senate. This might be fixed by the council-of-retired-judges defining districts as suggested by my Governator, or perhaps a districtless legislature. >Shrug<