[sionnsar]

In 1913, that all changed when the election of Senators was taken away from the states and handed over to the people. That year also marked the beginning of the modern age of lobbyists. And corruption.

All well said, however, though I'm not a historian, wasn't part of the appeal of the 17th a different corruption?

Having worked at times (as a private citizen) "with" our state legislature on bills stemming from loss of federal monies if certain laws aren't adopted, I'm quite unhappy with this kind of manipulation.

Particularly when analysis sometimes shows the cost of implementation to be greater than the monies lost by refusal, but rarely do they figure that out for themselves -- though to be sure, in the pile-on file-it-and-vote-it-now free-for-all that passes for "in session" in this state, few of them have the time to think anything through.

So sometimes I do it for them.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

All well said, however, though I'm not a historian, wasn't part of the appeal of the 17th a different corruption?

There was some incidence of bribery in the appointment of Senators prior to the 17th. The first reported case of such was in 1872. The process of appointment was also corrupted by political parties and democratization.