Tables turned: Scientist Judith Curry and Author Mark Steyn question, school Sen Markey on climate

knutesea,
My own opinion is that the 17th Amendment took far too much power away from the States, and handed it to the respective political Parties headquartered in Washington DC. Prior to the 17th, each state’s legislature elected its own senators.
The state legislatures used to groom their candidates, then horse trade with other state legislatures. Better candidates tended to be chosen, and the citizens of the states had a much bigger say in the selection process.
But now the national Dem and Rep parties select each state’s candidates for senator, and those who win are indebted to their party, not to their state or its citizens. The national parties dole out the money; candidates either play ball, or they’re starved of funds.
So the party bigwigs in Washington DC now call the shots. It doesn’t matter if Sen Feinstein (for example) from California is told by her party to vote directly against the interests of her state’s citizens. She will do it in a heartbeat (and often has), because she is beholden to the national party over her state’s citizens.
The 17th Amendment is one of the worst changes to the Constitution. Back when the Constitution was being formulated, about sixty years of intense discussion preceded its passage. Those decades were spent discussing the best way to create a govenrment, largely in coffee houses and with the belief that they wouldn’t really get the chance to implement their ideas. So the emotion and the self-interest was taken out of the discussion. The proposed rules were thoroughly debated by people who weren’t interrupted by TV, or video games, or texting, or Hollywood, or email, or sports, or all the other distractions we have now.
Furthermore, they were highly educated, and very aware of history. They knew every form of government since ancient Egypt, and the Greek city-states, Macedonia, and Rome. They understood despotic dictatorships, good and bad kings and queens, Parliaments, and the original democracies. They read Plato and all the other Classics. They understood and debated what worked, and what didn’t.
And they knew human nature as well as any KGB colonel. They studied human nature and applied it to the proposed new government. The result was as close to perfect as any government that ever existed.
But then the meddling began. Income became the primary tax base, instead of property. Everyone must use real property, and property can’t be hidden away like income. Also, income eventually required withholding, so the tax bite didn’t come once a year. It came out of every paycheck, and like the frog in water heating up, the populace accepted much higher taxes than they would have otherwise.
The 17th Amendment re-directed power to unelected party operatives, and away from the states’ citizens (we were set up as the United States, but now that’s in name only.) So as the new amendments piled up, they changed what was originally a near-perfect set of rules. Had we remained with the original Constitution and Bill of Rights and added nothing more, the country would be far better off today.
The original intent was that the states would be the laboratories of the republic, trying out various ways to solve problems. The states that did it best would be emulated by other states, and the federal government would just take care of interstate commence, the administration of federal justice, dealing with foreign countries, and a few other national requirements. But most regulations (the EPA comes to mind) would be handled by the individual states. If someone didn’t like the way their state was handling things, they would be free to move to a state more in line with their views.
That has all gone by the wayside. Early in the last century the Rockefellers commissioned a study of how to influence (in other words, how to control) the population. The results of their study concluded that if they controlled the twenty-five largest newspapers in the country (this was before TV, and there was very little radio then) they would be able to get whatever federal legislation passed that they wanted.
They took that advice, and that lesson hasn’t been lost on others. Today only six entities control all of the major media, with the exception of the internet. You can be certain that plans are actively being made to control that information exchange, too. “Net neutrality” is the stalking horse for that takeover.
So unless something completely unexpected happens, I think an EU-style dictatorship is a done deal: rules will be enacted by nameless, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats, who will implement regulations with the force of law — just like the EPA does now. And most Americans are not aware that the EU President (de Rumpuy) was never elected. He was installed by a shadowy group of bureaucratic bigwigs, and of course they are his constituents, not the citizens. Karl Marx even warned about such rule by bureaucracy. Now it’s happened in the EU.
It’s starting to happen here, too: the President just proposed an extention of the “terrorist watch list” law. Those on the list will not be permitted to fly, or to purchase or possess firearms, or do many other things that are now taken for granted in a free country. Worse, they won’t need to be convicted of anything, but simply put on the watch list. And they won’t be told who put them on the list, or why.
They will find out only when they try to buy a firearm, or ammunition, or try to buy an airline ticket, or any of the other forbidden things denied to those on the watch list. Most disturbing, their names will be put on the watch list by unaccountable, anonymous bureaucrats. They will not be allowed to face their accusers. Citizens might be able to challenge it if they are put on the watch list, but they will need a good lawyer, and be prepared to spend a lot of money to clear their name — and then another politically appointed bureaucrat can simply re-enter their name on the watch list. Can you see the tempatation to put people on an ‘enemies list’? Zombie Nixon must be spinning in his grave with jealousy.
I don’t know the answer. The country has been dumbed down by decades of government .edu factories that produce mass ignorance. Inertia is moving society in the direction the EU has taken, and stopping it or changing course will take a tremendous effort of national will — and plenty of luck. And I’m afraid the worst is coming in the last half of this President’s second term.
Almost without exception, no one on the national scene will stand up for American citizens’ basic right and freedoms. We all know there are major problems. A real leader is necessary, but most of the putative ‘leaders’ just want to tweak the system, instead of forcing it back to its roots. That makes them part of the problem.
Yes, I’m a pessimist about this. Will someone please cheer me up? C’mon, promise me a miracle! Gimme some happy talk.  ☹