Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: theDentist
well, corruption aside, I’d rather that the Public vate for Senators, thus they have to answer to and convince their constituents to cast their their vote between the candidates, than only need convince and influence a few hundred people. After all, it’s not unusual for Legislatures to thumb their noses at the people and do what’s in their own self-interest.

Not uncommon? I'd say it's the rule. And that's why I prefer the two legislative levels to be in competition with each other. As it stands now the states are just administrative subdivisions of the whole. Previously the states could use the power to choose senators as a check on the power of congress - that's why the senate was created. With the senate being democratic why even have it?

25 posted on 10/19/2007 11:03:50 AM PDT by antinomian (Show me a robber baron and I'll show you a pocket full of senators.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: antinomian
You're right. And with the House being Democratic, why have that either? We'll just put all the apples in the Presidency. After all, he's a Republican (supposedly). But if Hillary gets in, no Senate, no House, just her....

Yeah, good call.

26 posted on 10/19/2007 11:18:04 AM PDT by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll. "What happens if neutrinos have mass?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson