Thus, SCOTUS can make a Roe v. Wade decision which overturns laws in essentially all states - laws which no one suspected were unconstitutional when they were debated and passed. Such a decision would have been harder to achieve if the people who confirmed judges and convicted them of impeachment represented the state governments rather than the people of the states, as now.
I confess that I have no solution for the fact that the technology of politicians' ability to choose their own voters via the gerrymander has been perfected via computer, making House races generally uncompetitive. The result of that being that it is the Senate, ironically, which is the more democratic institution than the House. At least they can't gerrymander state borders.
I don’t like state governments any more than the federal government. Most of them suck, mine sure does. After 2006 and 2008 most state officeholders are liberal democrats.
You countered nothing of what I said. Socialism is inconsistent with the founder’s design. Taking away the people’s (the REAL government of the state) right to directly elect their Senators will do nothing to counter socialism and will make corruption worse, possibly significantly worse.
You seem to think that state officeholders would oppose federal power just cause. If they are liberal democrats or RINOs they don’t. They like government power, period, at every level.