re: #87 GeneJockey

I’m going to push back on that by pointing out that the people ARE the states, and to say that the Senate is to be “the voice of the states not of the people” makes no sense.

The reason the anti-17th Amendment folks want it repealed has nothing to do with any nonsensical ‘the voice of the states not of the people’ idea, but rather they know they’ve been more successful in winning state legislatures than Senate races.

I agree that it is nonsensical to have a house of the states. But the Senate was supposed to be and that’s how it was organized. That’s also why the Senate and not the House approves treaties and Cabinet/judicial appointees. These are powers that were supposed to be done with the approval of the states (as represented by the Senate) not approved by the people (who have their representation in the House).

As I said, I agree that it is nonsensical to have a house of the states. I think it’s nonsensical to not have a unicameral (popular) legislature. And repealing the 17th would be a worse outcome than not repealing it. But that doesn’t mean that the Senate should continue to exist.