Many of the "state legislatures" in the deep south have been gerrymandered by slimy RAT party machines since reconstruction, regardless of the fact the state votes for conservative Republicans on the federal(and statewide) level. Popular GOP Senators like Jeff Sessions that would otherwise win re-election handily with a mandate from the people would immediately be replaced with sleazy RAT hacks that do Harry Reid's bidding. They'd then be in power for life regardless of how "the people" feel, with the Dems holding lopsided majorities in the state legislature. All of the conservatives from North Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana would be removed immediately by their RAT state legislators.
Some states going from usually conservative representation to one-party socialist representation in the U.S. Senate:
NORTH CAROLINA (NC HOUSE 68-RAT, 52-GOP ; NC SENATE 31-RAT, 19-GOP)
ALABAMA (AL HOUSE 61-RAT, 43-GOP; AL SENATE 25-RAT, 10-GOP),
MISSISSIPPI (MS HOUSE 74-RAT, 47-GOP, MS SENATE 27-RAT, 25-GOP),
LOUISIANA (LA HOUSE 53-RAT, 48-GOP, LA SENATE 23-RAT, 16-GOP)
I also think Tennessee would send at least one DIABLO to the Senate, since the Tennessee House is currently controlled by a RAT majority with a RINO puppet as "speaker"
You'd also ensure states like Arkansas, where Republicans occasionally get elected to the Senate (Blanche Lincoln is very vulnerable in 2010), instead send nothing but marxists to the Senate for life (the GOP "opposition" in the RAT legislature is so small they can fit in a phone booth). The same is true here in Illinois, since our state legislature was redrawn in 2002 to give Chicago an unfair lopsided majority and ensure all us Cook County suburbanites are "represented" by Chicago politicians in the legislature. Right now, the only way non-Chicagoans get any actual "representation" in Illinois is thur state judges and U.S. Congressmen
Ironically, IL Constitution Party Chairman Randy Stufflebeam is also a big cheerleader for "abolishing the 17th amendment". Third parties always complain about the two main parties "locking them out" of the political process, but I can think of no greater way to rig the Senate for "two parties only" than abolishing the 17th amendment. Third parties certainly have the potential to send people to the U.S. Senate now -- all they need is 34% of the vote (or less in a four way race) to win a U.S. Senate seat. That's why we have two Senators right now that weren't elected with a "D" or an "R" next to their name on the ballot. But there's no way in hell that "third parties" will ever get a sizeable presence in state legislatures, let alone a majority in a state legislative body that would be needed to send one of their own to the Senate. The founding fathers had no way of knowing how political parties would develop when they decided state legislatures would choose Senators, but in today's political world it would ensure government of the Republicrat fatcats, for the Republicrat fatcats, and by the Republicrat fatcats.
We’ve got a majority in both bodies in TN now (19R-14D in the Senate, 51R-48D in the House, due to a recent special election). We, however, would not have elected (via the joint session of the legislature) our first GOP Senator since Reconstruction until January of this year. We elected our first Republican officials (Sec of State, Treasurer & Comptroller) for the first time since Reconstruction in the January joint session. Because of the chronic occupation of the majority of legislatures by Democrat majorities, some states would simply never elect Republicans again to the Senate, one big strike against the 17th Amendment. The GOP Senators would also tend to be top-heavy from the midwestern states (ND, for example, wouldn’t be chronically electing Dems, ditto SD, nor NE — in those 3 states, we’d have 6 GOP Senators as opposed to the 3 we currently have).