Simone Lawson
The Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution changed the way senators are elected. Before the amendment, senators were appointed by state legislatures, and the governor or executive authority of each state could appoint a senator in the event of a vacancy. However, after its ratification in 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment provided for the direct election of senators by popular vote, with each state electing two senators for a six-year term. The reform was not without opposition, as some argued that it threatened the rights and independence of the states and that renowned senators may not have been elected directly. Nevertheless, the amendment marked a significant shift in the way senators are chosen, and it had a notable impact on the political composition of the U.S. Senate.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Name of Amendment | Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) |
| Date of Ratification | April 8, 1913 |
| Changes | Established the direct election of United States senators in each state |
| Superseded Article I, Section 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution | |
| Allows voters to cast direct votes for senators | |
| Senators are now "elected by the people thereof" instead of being "chosen by the Legislature thereof" | |
| Allows state legislatures to permit their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election can be held | |
| States that rejected the Amendment | Utah, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Virginia |
| States that did not take action | Alaska and Hawaii (not yet states at the time of the amendment's proposal) |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The 17th Amendment
The Amendment was proposed by the 62nd Congress in 1912 and became part of the Constitution on April 8, 1913, after ratification by three-quarters of state legislatures. It was the first time that all senatorial elections were held by popular vote. The Amendment also altered the procedure for filling Senate vacancies, allowing state legislatures to empower their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election could be held.
The road to the 17th Amendment was long and fraught with opposition. Calls for a constitutional amendment regarding Senate elections started in the early 19th century, with similar amendments introduced in 1829 and 1855. By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, several states had enacted measures allowing voters to express their choice for senator, following the Oregon Plan. This plan was a response to concerns about bribery and corruption in Senate elections, and it allowed for a state primary election to identify voters' choices while requiring candidates for the state legislature to honour the primary's result.
Despite growing support for reform, the Senate repeatedly blocked attempts to pass a constitutional amendment, with opponents arguing that it threatened states' rights and independence. However, a turning point came in 1906 when publisher William Randolph Hearst hired novelist David Graham Phillips to write a series of articles exposing the corruption in the Senate. This galvanised public support for reform, and in 1911, Senator Joseph Bristow of Kansas offered a Senate resolution to amend the Constitution, which was approved by the Senate and later by the House of Representatives.
Amending the Constitution: Understanding the Process
You may want to see also
Direct election of senators
The direct election of senators, also known as the Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution, was proposed by the 62nd Congress in 1912 and became part of the Constitution on April 8, 1913, after ratification by three-quarters (36) of the state legislatures. The amendment establishes the direct election of United States senators by the people of each state, replacing the original system where senators were appointed by state legislatures.
Prior to the Seventeenth Amendment, each state legislature chose its state's senators for a six-year term. This was based on the Connecticut Compromise, which granted each state, regardless of size, two senators. However, this system faced criticism and calls for reform due to concerns over bribery and corruption in senatorial elections. Over half of the states adopted the "Oregon System," which utilized a state primary election to identify voters' choices for senator.
The Seventeenth Amendment provides for the election of senators by replacing the phrase "chosen by the Legislature thereof" with "elected by the people thereof." It also alters the procedure for filling Senate vacancies, allowing state legislatures to authorize their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election can be held. The amendment ensures that the election or term of any senator chosen before its enactment remains unaffected.
The direct election of senators had a significant impact on the political composition of the U.S. Senate. Opponents of the reform argued that it threatened the rights and independence of the states, while supporters believed that changing the mode of election would not change senatorial responsibilities. The first senator directly elected under the Seventeenth Amendment was Augustus Bacon of Georgia on July 15, 1913, and the following year marked the first time that all senatorial elections were held by popular vote.
Amending the Georgia Constitution: A Step-by-Step Guide
You may want to see also
State legislatures' role
The Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution changed how senators are elected. Before the amendment, state legislatures played a significant role in choosing senators to represent their state. Each state legislature selected two senators to serve a six-year term in the Senate, regardless of the state's size. This was based on the Connecticut Compromise, which aimed to balance the representation of small and large states.
However, this process faced criticism and calls for reform. Proponents of direct election, including Oregon, argued that voters should have a direct say in choosing their senators. As a result, many states adopted the "Oregon Plan" for election reform, allowing voters to express their preference for senators. This movement gained further momentum through publications such as David Graham Phillips' "The Treason of the Senate" series in 1906, which criticised senators' allegiances.
The original method of electing senators through state legislatures had its advantages. It ensured that states retained their independence and influence in the federal system. Opponents of reform argued that changing the mode of election would threaten the rights and independence of states. They believed that renowned senators may not have been elected directly and that the existing system, with senators experienced in the already directly elected House, was functioning adequately.
The Seventeenth Amendment, proposed in 1911 by Senator Joseph Bristow of Kansas, directly addressed the election of senators. It established that senators would be "elected by the people" of their state, replacing the previous phrase "chosen by the Legislature thereof". This amendment marked a significant shift in the role of state legislatures, as it transferred the power to elect senators from the state legislatures to the citizens of each state. The amendment also altered the procedure for filling Senate vacancies, allowing state legislatures to empower their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election.
Amendments: The Evolution of US Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Appointment of senators
The appointment of senators was changed by the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which established the direct election of senators by the people of each state. This amendment was proposed in 1911 by Senator Joseph Bristow of Kansas, and it became part of the Constitution in 1913.
Prior to the Seventeenth Amendment, senators were appointed by state legislatures, and this often led to corruption and bribery, as exposed by the 1912 Senate investigation into the election of Illinois Senator William Lorimer. The reform was strongly opposed by some, who argued that it threatened the rights and independence of the states, and that renowned senators may not have been elected under a popular vote system.
The Seventeenth Amendment altered the process for filling Senate vacancies. It allows the governor or executive authority of each state, if authorised by that state's legislature, to appoint a senator in the event of a vacancy, until a special election can be held. This change addressed the issue of malapportionment of state legislatures, where rural counties and cities were given equal weight, resulting in an unequal distribution of voting power.
The transition to the direct election of senators began with special elections in Georgia and Maryland, followed by the 1914 election. It was completed in 1919 when the senators chosen in the 1918 election took office.
Amendments: Your Rights and Freedoms
You may want to see also
Reform and public support
The Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which was ratified on April 8, 1913, changed the process of electing senators. The amendment established that senators would be directly elected by the voting public during elections, replacing the previous system where they were appointed by state legislatures. This change was driven by reformers who advocated for more democratic and accountable representation in the Senate.
Public support for reforming the way senators were elected grew in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Several factors contributed to this increasing support. Firstly, there was a perception of corruption and influence-peddling among state legislatures, with wealthier individuals bribing legislatures to secure their appointments. This was exacerbated by instances of electoral deadlock, where state legislatures failed to reach agreements, leaving Senate seats vacant for extended periods. Additionally, in the post-Civil War era, disputes among state legislators over Senate elections resulted in numerous deadlocks, further highlighting the need for reform.
A turning point in the push for reform came in 1906, with the publication of David Graham Phillips' series, "The Treason of the Senate," in Cosmopolitan magazine. Phillips, a muckraker, portrayed senators as corrupt and in the pockets of industrialists and financiers. This series galvanized public opinion and brought the issue of Senate reform into the national spotlight.
By the early 20th century, several states, including Oregon, had already implemented measures allowing voters to express their choice for senator, deviating from the traditional method of selection by state legislatures. These reforms, known as the "Oregon Plan," gained traction across the country, with other states following suit and advocating for a similar approach.
The reformers' campaign for a constitutional amendment gained momentum in the Senate as well. In 1911, Senator Joseph Bristow of Kansas proposed a resolution to amend the Constitution, which was approved by the Senate and subsequently moved to the House of Representatives. The resolution eventually became the Seventeenth Amendment upon ratification by three-quarters of the state legislatures in 1913.
The US Constitution's Eighth Amendment: History and Impact
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution.
The amendment was proposed by Senator Joseph Bristow of Kansas in 1911. It was passed by Congress on May 13, 1912, and ratified on April 8, 1913, with Connecticut's approval giving it the required three-fourths majority.
The Seventeenth Amendment established the direct election of United States senators by popular vote, replacing the previous system where senators were appointed by state legislatures. It also altered the procedure for filling Senate vacancies, allowing governors to make temporary appointments.
Reformers argued that direct election of senators would address concerns of bribery and corruption in Senate elections. It would also ensure that senators represented the people's choice and reduce the influence of industrialists and financiers.
Yes, opponents argued that renowned senators may not have been elected directly and changing the mode of election would threaten the rights and independence of the states. Some also believed that a constitutional amendment was pointless as the Senate already had experience with direct elections.
