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

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The whole point is that the Senators would be charged with representing their state's interests directly and the legislators would have to answer to the voters for their choice, should the senators fail in that mission.

It would weaken the party influence dramatically. For example, Schumer and Gillibrand in New York would have to vote down a horrendous health care bill that would bring horrific added costs to their state, rather than sucking it up and voting for it for the good of their party.

Direct election of Senators made them the party animals they currently are. Their mission and reason for existence, as described in the constitution, was destroyed. Now we have hacks instead of statesmen.

28 posted on 01/26/2010 5:21:27 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dead

Have you seen the NY legislature ? Thugs like Schumer (joined by seatmate Mario Cuomo) would be safe for life, he wouldn’t even have to raise a dime. You’d never have to worry about a Republican winning there, the last would’ve been in 1970. All Democrat after 1975. Good luck with that increased accountability, because it ain’t gonna happen.


33 posted on 01/26/2010 5:25:53 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: dead; Arthur Wildfire! March; BillyBoy; fieldmarshaldj
It would weaken the party influence dramatically.

It would strengthen the party influence tremendously cause only a couple hundred career politicians would get a say.

Direct election of Senators made them the party animals they currently are

You think those wonderful rat and RINO state legislators aren't "party animals"? Why in the world do you think liberal state legislators oppose federal spending? Why don't you poll poll the NY rat legislators. I guarantee you at least 8 out of 10 of them would vote for this Obamacare. New Senator Jeff Merkey was recently Speaker of the Oregon house. You telling me his rat successor to that office is begging him to vote against Obamacare? LOL.

The whole point is that the Senators would be charged with representing their state's interests directly and the legislators would have to answer to the voters for their choice,

Rat (and RINO) state legislators themselves DON'T currently vote in their state's interest. They vote to increase state spending and taxes every week! Senators are currently directly accountable to the voters of the state. A lot of the jerkwads will be losing this year. Including the rat in Arkansas where the rats have like 70% of the legislative seats so they'd be keeping that one under this scheme.

My state (IL) would send the daughter (state AG) of the state house speaker (D) to the Senate, guaranteed. Nuts to that. I'm glad I have a right to vote for my own Senators. I live in Chicago, my vote is worthless in local elections and US house elections in my heavily rat districts. Statewide is the only place my vote has any power. You wanna take away my right to vote for my Senators and give to scumbag super corrupt legislators? Give the to power to some jerkwad who's been State House Speaker (save for 2 years 95-96 when the house was Republican) since before I was born? Nuts to that idea. Forgive the harsh tone of this post but the idea offends me. I take pleasure in knowing this silliness is a total non-starter.

48 posted on 01/26/2010 6:04:45 AM PST by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN | NO "INDIVIDUAL MANDATE"!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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