The opposition of the far right to the 17th amendment (the one that says the people get to elect their Senators) has always been hard to fathom. They say it gives the states more power over the feds--having legislatures appoint Senators would somehow do that. But taking away the popular vote to do so is a little ... well, counter-productive. It's also a bit awkward for those candidates advocating repeal while at the same time running for the Senate. Witness Colorado's Ken Buck, who has tied himself in knots on the issue.
In a brief phone call to the Huffington Post, Buck said that he did not favor repealing the 17th Amendment, which allows the public, not state legislatures, to vote on who represents them in the Senate. As late as June 2009, Buck had held the opposite view, telling the Pikes Peak Economics Club, that the American public needed to be educated "about the populist nature of the 17th Amendment and how it has taken us down the wrong path."
"I don't know that we get [repeal] tomorrow, but I think we get there in the very near future when people understand just what a horrendous effect the 17th amendment has been on the federal government's spending."
Reached by phone on Friday afternoon, Buck explained that immediately after delivering those remarks, he rethought his position on the 17th Amendment debate. Since then, he stressed, he has been opposed to the notion of repeal.
"It is not a position I still hold and it wasn't a position I held a day later when I called back the guy who asked the question and talked to him about the issue and reflected more on it," Buck said. "It doesn't make sense to repeal the 17th amendment and I have said it a dozen of times."
"Elect me so I can repeal your vote" turned out to be a crappy slogan, apparently.