Written By: Brian Duignan

Seventeenth Amendment, amendment (1913) to the Constitution of the United States that provided for the direct election of U.S. senators by the voters of the states.

It altered the electoral mechanism established in Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution, which had provided for the appointment of senators by the state legislatures.

Adopted in the Progressive era of democratic political reform, the amendment reflected popular dissatisfaction with the corruption and inefficiency that had come to characterize the legislative election of U.S. senators in many states.

The amendment changed the wording of Article I, Section 3, Paragraph 1 to state that “two Senators from each State” should be “elected by the people thereof” rather than “chosen by the Legislature thereof.” It also revised Paragraph 2 of Section 3 to allow the state executive to fill vacancies in the Senate by making temporary appointments to serve until new elections could be held.

The full text of the amendment is

• The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
• When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
• This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

By the time of the amendment’s adoption, many states had already established mechanisms that effectively allowed voters to choose the senators of their state (e.g., by having the legislature appoint the winners of party primaries). Nevertheless, the amendment was widely seen as necessary to reduce the influence of big business and other special interests on the selection of senators and to prevent vacancies or frequent turnover in the Senate caused by party wrangling or changes of party leadership at the state level. In the late 20th century some conservative political scholars called for the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment on the grounds that it undermined the proper balance of power between the federal government and the states (see also states’ rights).

On April 8, 2024, there will be a partial solar eclipse visible from Seattle, Washington. Although it won’t be a total eclipse, you’ll still have the opportunity to witness a celestial event.

For this eclipse, all of North and Central America will be able to see at least a partial eclipse, according to Space.com. Here’s how much of the eclipse you will experience depending on where you live in Washington state, according to TimeandDate.com : Seattle: 20.02% Tacoma: 20.37% Everett: 19.77% Port Angeles: 18.07% Spokane: 26.71% – kgw.com

Check out People, for the complete article

PFAS are concerning, the CDC says, because “studies of laboratory animals given large amounts of PFAS indicate that some PFAS may affect growth and development. In addition, these animal studies indicate PFAS may affect reproduction, thyroid function, the immune system, and injure the liver.” 

The Environmental Protection Agency adds that PFAS may cause decreased fertility, developmental delays, increased cancer risk, and impact the immune system.

PEOPLE reached out to the companies listed as having products with the highest levels of PFAS in the report for comment. At press time, CVS was the only company to reply.

“CVS Pharmacy’s store brands are designed to maximize quality and safety, work as intended, comply with regulations, and satisfy customers,” a rep for CVS told PEOPLE in an email. “We’re in the process of reviewing and evaluating the information in Mamavation’s bandage report.”

Source: PEOPLE will update this report as more information is available.

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE’s free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.

For more People news, make sure to sign up for our newsletter!

Read the original article on People.

Our racial justice infrastructure and bedrock civil rights laws are under attack by the same people who brought us voter suppression and bans on Black history.

Christopher Rufo, Stephen Miller, Kris Kobach and Ed Blum are mobilizing a pro-discrimination agenda to restrict Black people’s access to the workplace and our education system, and to restore Jim Crow-era privileges for white people.

They have been behind attacks ranging from the lawsuit that last year successfully struck down Affirmative Action in college admissions; to trying to shut down the Black-led Fearless Fund for supporting Black-owned businesses; to bullying law firms across the country to end scholarship and internship programs meant for Black students; to the introduction of state legislation that would make any efforts to address anti-Black discrimination illegal; to almost daily lawsuits against corporations for making diversity commitments.

These continuous and coordinated efforts by neo-segregationists to enshrine white privilege and pro-white discrimination have a central dangerous end goal: To reinstate the policies, laws and cultural norms that sustained Jim Crow at every level of society. That includes striking down the federal Civil Rights Act — one of the biggest wins of the Civil Rights Movement — that guarantees us all freedom from discrimination.

The threat from these neo-segregationists is real. With a U.S. Supreme Court majority deeply sympathetic to their white nationalist vision for America, and nearly a quarter of lower court judges having been hand picked by extremist Donald Trump himself, none of our laws are safe that guarantee equality and freedom from discrimination or that actively repair those harms. As long as millions in corporate donations flow into their coffers, these neo-segregationists will have the resources to keep challenging our bedrock civil rights laws in court until they get the outcome they want. We cannot let that happen. We have the power to do something about it.

Join us in demanding corporate charities stop funding neo-segregationists and their plot to enshrine unearned opportunity and privilege for white people.

To Corporate Charities:

Here is the Petition:

During the last few years, neo-segregationists have mobilized to restrict Black people’s access to the workplace and our education system, and to restore Jim Crow-era privileges for white people. This movement is actively undermining the legislative wins of the Civil Rights Movement by threatening major corporations for their efforts at racial inclusivity and has introduced anti-DEI legislation in several states to co-opt civil rights and diversity vernacular to exclude Black employees and students from fair and equal opportunities.

The leaders of the neo-segregationist movement, Ed Blum, Chris Rufo, Kris Kobach, and Stephen Miller, as well as the network of organizations they lead, have received millions from corporate charities like yours. Christopher Rufo, who previously spearheaded efforts to eliminate Black history in schools across the country, has laid bare the end goal of their neo-segregationist agenda to eliminate all civil rights protections, explicitly calling for the dismantling of the Civil Rights Act.

Without action from your charity, we will continue to see entire university systems, such as what recently transpired with the University of Florida, close down their efforts to address discrimination and inequality and guarantee that the unjust and privileged access of white students remains permanently ensconced. And we will see financial institutions like Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and Bank of New York roll back and eliminate programs that attempt to address the discriminatory structures that have made their workplaces overwhelmingly white and male. As leaders of the biggest charities in the nation, you have a responsibility to demonstrate that your actions align with your values regarding creating workplaces and educational opportunities free from discrimination.

Source: Color of Change