re: #70 Schadenboner

I’m going to attempt to sever anti-17th Amendmentism from the rest of the wingnut nonsense. I don’t think that repeal of the 17th is a good idea but I do agree with the fundamental kernel here:

The Senate was, as laid out in the Constitution, supposed to be the voice of the states not of the people. Once you’ve re-made the Senate into state-wide House seats you have fundamentally altered who/what it represents. And the amazingly anti-democratic nature of the Senate makes a strange mix with the democratic character of the 17th Amendment.

As I said, I’m not a fan of repealing it because, given the amazing amount of corruption that exists at the state level, I can’t imagine that going back to the pre-17th situation would be a good thing, but that doesn’t mean that the 17th was a particularly good idea.

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The reason the anti-17th Amendment folks want it repealed has nothing to do with any nonsensical ‘the voice of the states not of the people’ idea, but rather they know they’ve been more successful in winning state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