Home  / News / Press Releases

Oct 18, 2010

You be the judge: Does Gosar have a problem with the 17th Amendment?

Earlier this week, CD1 candidate Paul Gosar's campaign manager blasted out a fundraising e-mail claiming that lies are being spread about Gosar's problems with the 17th Amendment. The e-mail said: "As you are aware our Ann Kirkpatrick has launched a serious [sic] of character attacks against Dr. Gosar and his family. Her DC handlers have even gone so far as to lie about Dr. Gosar’s stance on the 17th Amendment."

The e-mail doesn't explain how Gosar's stance is being misrepresented. Fortunately, this is an easy issue to resolve. In fact, Gosar can resolve it right now, in his own words. Read or listen to these excerpts of Gosar discussing the 17th Amendment and decide for yourselves whether Gosar supports the 17th Amendment.

At an Aug. 12 event with Hugh Hewitt, Gosar said:

“There’s an unintended consequence when you change this document (holds up a copy of the Constitution). I bring up the 17th Amendment. ... Prior to the 17th Amendment, our senators came from our statehouse. ... And you look at some of the problems we now have in what I call our senior circuit, the U.S. Senate -- five years you can do whatever you want and then that last year you can go ahead and campaign to try and get re-election. ... So I'm not in favor of that.”

Still not sure? Watch the video.

At a July 13, Flagstaff Tea Party event, Gosar said:

“I think that you have to go back to the Constitution ... If you look at our 17th Amendment, it used to be that our senators came from our statehouse directly. Now we came up with the 17th Amendment, and all of a sudden now we have, we have some problems in the senior circuit (in the Senate). So be careful what you ask for.”

Still not sure? Watch the video.

Background:

The 17th Amendment allows for the direct election of U.S. senators by the public rather than by state legislatures. Its ratification in 1913 directly empowered voters, and Arizona was the second state in the nation to ratify it. Abandoning this amendment would put even more influence in the hands of career politicians and their special-interest backers -- and take it away from the people.

###