17th Amendment worth reflection
To the editor:
In 1913, the ratification of the 17th Amendment changed how U.S. Senators are selected — from appointment by state legislatures to direct election by popular vote. While intended to curb corruption and increase transparency, this shift fundamentally altered the balance of power between the states and the federal government.
The founders designed the Senate to represent the states as sovereign entities, not just the people. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton envisioned a chamber that would temper popular passions and preserve federalism. By removing state legislatures from the selection process, the 17th Amendment weakened this safeguard and nationalized the Senate.
Today, Senators often serve party platforms and donor interests more than the unique needs of their home states. Repealing the 17th Amendment would restore the Senate’s original role, strengthen state influence, and rebalance federal power. Critics worry about reduced voter input and potential gridlock, but the people still elect their state legislators — who would, in turn, select Senators accountable to state priorities.
This is not a call to nostalgia, but to restoration. Repeal would reaffirm our commitment to a republic where states are partners, not pawns. As civic leaders and engaged citizens, we must reflect on the founders’ vision and consider how best to preserve it for future generations.
Let us speak not only of policy, but of purpose — and remember the Constitution calls us to courage, not comfort.
Danny Bartlett Ware County
Bartlett is the Field Coordinator for the John Birch Society covering Georgia, Alabama, and the panhandle of Florida. He can be reached at [email protected]
Reporting questioned of city commission
To the editor:
Your 29 October, 2025 edition was forwarded to me by a friend. I’m certainly impressed that I made the page one/top-of-the-fold spot, although I’m not really sure why. Only a couple of my comments were featured at the last of this article, somewhere toward the back of the edition.
And, the comments were misquotes (sic), generated by the author of the article.
I never stated the city attorney “… didn’t deserve to be in the seat.” I stated he “didn’t belong” in the seat. There’s a difference.
Four months now, he’s been replacing the actual city attorney hired in June — speaking for her, acting on her behalf, and carrying on like she was never hired. I stated it, and for clarification, will state it again — attorney (Cheslyn) Green belongs in that seat, not Spearman. She was hired for that seat. Taxpayers notice they're having to pay for two attorneys.
There’s another misquote, at the end of the article, attributed to me as well, in addition to a rearrangement of actual events (for dramatic impact by the writer I suppose) This does not lend credibility to the author, or the paper its (sic) printed in.
I understand how mistakes are sometimes made. Understand also a reporter’s writings HAVE TO coincide with the record and actual fact. Otherwise, call it opinion and not news. All he had to do was check the tape if he wasn’t sure.
This is not the first case with me, but this paper should take pains to make sure it is the last.
H.M. Hargrove Waycross Editor’s note: A check of the video posted on Facebook of the Waycross City Commission’s October 20 planning and information session referenced by the writer shows the direct quote attributed to the writer was correct.
Observation from a poll worker
To the editor:
I am 70 years old and have been voting most of my adult life. I have used paper ballots where you color in the oval, punch ballots where you can have those “hanging chads”, and I have used various electronic ballots.
The one thing different with this past election is that I decided to be a poll worker so I could see the “process” of voting and not just the act of voting. I was also lucky enough to have the opportunity to see behind the scenes and work with the various voting machines used in an election. This included the scanner, the ballot/candidate selection screen, and the check-in pad. (These aren’t the real names for the different machines but a better description.)
I witnessed and helped get the various machines ready for the election including uploading the ballots and the voter files. I worked during early voting, delivered the equipment to the precincts, and on election day was a poll worker.
Then after the polls closed, I was back at the Board of Elections office and witnessed the transfer of the ballot files which were tallied and the results announced.
For there to be widespread “election” fraud, you must have a conspiracy from a number of sophisticated people who are skilled in the election process as well as computers.
This cannot happen at the local level alone. There are too many checks and balances at the local, state and federal levels that would detect an error in the system. The different equipment can’t communicate with each other and the programs uploaded into them are done from separate files.
Now I am not saying that there can’t be “voter” fraud at the local level. Voters could register using a false address or have forged ID’s just to name a few. But again, the system is designed to try to correctly verify every voter.
Citizens need to stay engaged when it comes to voting. They need to be aware of the next election and who is running. They need to be proactive in assuring they are correctly registered especially when they have recently moved.
In this past election, I had two voters who had recently moved but did not change their registration with the Board of Elections. One was from a different county and the other from a different precinct. Both were not allowed to vote due to incorrect addresses.
I also had one who had recently moved and had not received their new ID, but their address was corrected in the election system. This one did get to vote.
I had another voter who cast their ballot during early voting and came on election day to vote. They were told that they had voted already. This voter, realizing their mistake, stated they thought that it was a different election.
I worked alongside the staff and many poll workers. I can honestly say that each of them were intent on having a fair and accurate election. They were intent on having all voters cast their ballot and never intentionally denied anyone from voting who was eligible.
Election officials and poll workers have a deep desire for true and honest elections. They do not spend over 14 hours on election day trying to scheme the system.
Those who believe the election process in this county is corrupt or election officials are “rigging” the election have no real basis for their accusations. They do not know the election process and the steps taken to ensure voting integrity.
Sure, there will be some “human” errors, but if caught in time and officials are notified, they will do their best to correct them so that the voter can cast their ballot.
If you still believe the election process is corrupt, the best way to correct the system is to get involved. Join me for the next election as a poll worker during election day but be prepared to work over 14 hours with your integrity on the line.
Steven T. Davis Ware County
The Waycross Journal-Herald welcomes letters on any subject. Letters should be limited to 300 words, contain contact information of the writer and emailed to church@wjhnews. com.
