September 16, 2010 in Idaho

Idaho governor now opposes repeal of 17th Amendment

Otter, Allred debate education, taxes, wilderness

• Print
• Email
• Share

Associated Press photo

Gov. Butch Otter, left, and Keith Allred, center, talk with moderator James Weatherby before their debate Wednesday.
(Full-size photo)

BOISE – Idaho Gov. Butch Otter appears to be abandoning an issue important to many tea party activists.

The Republican seeking a second term in the governor’s office declared during a political debate Monday that he now opposes repeal of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which would return the selection of U.S. senators to state legislatures. But just five months ago, while in Spokane as a keynote speaker for a tea party rally in Riverfront Park, Otter was sharply critical of the 17th Amendment, which some conservative groups consider an intrusion on state’s rights and its repeal is part of the Idaho Republican Party’s state platform.

The governor’s comments came as he and Democratic challenger Keith Allred sparred over everything from education cuts to wilderness to whether Idaho should investigate its state Tax Commission for alleged special deals to influential taxpayers (Otter said that’s already been addressed; Allred disagreed).

Asked directly about the 17th Amendment during a debate before an audience of more than 400, Otter said, “I want Idahoans to elect our U.S. senators.”

He added, “I have said time and time again, and I’ll say again, my focus is on the 10th Amendment (reserving states’ rights). I do not believe you’re going to repeal the 17th Amendment, and have spent no time on repealing the 17th Amendment. That was a decision, and a very populist decision that was made in the early 20th century, and I believe that decision is one that is going to stand no matter who wants the 17th Amendment repealed.”

That’s a different message than the one he gave a cheering tea party crowd in Spokane’s downtown Riverfront Park five months ago.

“All of the amendments to the Constitution in one form or another, some of them I have a serious objection with, like the 17th Amendment, the direct election of United States senators,” Otter said at the time. “You know, that was the first big loss we had in states’ rights.”

Since then, he’s been noncommittal about the issue, saying he understands concerns about electing senators by popular vote rather than having legislatures choose them, but didn’t think the issue was likely to be addressed. Backers of repeal contend it would increase states’ rights by giving state legislatures a more formal say in the federal government.

Allred responded, “Here at the City Club in Boise, Butch Otter tells you that he thinks Idahoans should elect their own senators, but when he goes across the state line in Spokane to speak to the tea party, he says that the 17th Amendment was one of the biggest mistakes we’ve made.”

Otter’s campaign spokesman, Ryan Panitz, said Monday afternoon that Otter “has always disagreed with the 17th Amendment but from a practical stance, repealing it isn’t going to happen.”

Allred, a professional mediator, citizen activist and former Harvard professor, said, “This is what you see with career politicians, the flipping and flopping back and forth depending on their audience. I have been consistent and clear. Idahoans can, should elect their own senator.”

The issue was one of a broad array the two major-party candidates discussed during the hourlong debate, their second of the campaign. Two more face-offs are planned, including one to be broadcast live statewide on Idaho Public Television Oct. 28, the Thursday before the Nov. 2 election.

Also on the ballot in Idaho’s governor’s race are two independents, Boise businesswoman Jana Kemp and a candidate who’s legally changed his name to Pro-Life, and Libertarian candidate Ted Dunlap.

Five comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  oneanddone on September 16 at 7:55 a.m.

  “I actually did vote for it before I voted against it.”
  Butch “Kerry” Otter

  And how, pray tell, is allowing Idaho citizens to elect their own gov’t representation an attack on state’s rights? What legislators really want is a chance to sell their vote.

• 

  bdr on September 16 at 9:33 a.m.

  Its funny Otter is thinking of 10,17 when it comes to Mexicans
  and his citizens are thinking 30 ought 06.

• 

  PlanB on September 16 at 10:47 a.m.

  I also have been confused as to why anyone would think direct election of senators was infringing on state’s rights, other than some tea partier said it and the blind will follow no matter how illogical the statement is.

  Direct election was a response to years of corruption. Imagine only the party big-wigs being allowed to select senators behind closed doors. The founding fathers set that up originally because they didn’t think the citizens had the knowledge or ability to make the selection, but things have changed.

• 

  spokanecougar on September 16 at 12:59 p.m.

  Love how these Tea Baggers and conservative say the love the constitution and that it is the law of the land and the best constitution in the world……except the parts they don’t like and would like to change and/or repeal.

• 

  ArnoldZ on September 17 at 8:46 p.m.

  There is indeed a considerable gap between Tea Partiers who want to give government back to “the people” and the proposal to take selection of U. S. Senators away from the people and hand it to state legislatures. Regarding Governor Otter’s remarks, the 10th amendment mentions powers, not rights. Also, many southerners would say that the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments eroded “states’ rights” (thank God!) long before the 17th. Call me old fashioned, but I generally place the rights of people ahead of the rights of states.