Let me counter your argument. I’m going to use West Virginia as an example. I don’t know what the makeup of their state legislatures are, Republican or Democrat. Lets say they have a majority democratic legislature. Currently, Robert Byrd and Jay Rockefeller (their two Senators) are for Cap n Tax.
Now, even if they appointed two Democratic Senators that were responsible to the state legislature, do you think those two Senators would be for Cap N Tax with a state legislature that needs the Coal industry like West Virginia does? Byrd and Rockefeller are influenced by interests outside of West Virginia to vote for Cap N Tax, if they were dependent on West Virginia’s influence, there is no way they would vote for Cap N Tax...
You’re gonna reinforce my argument. I don’t think most of the people participating in this thread are remotely aware of the makeup of the state legislatures. I am, and from a historical standpoint as well. If the 17th remained in place, the last Republican Senator in WV would’ve taken office in 1929 (and even then, perhaps not). You’d not have had to worry about a GOP legislature for 80 years, and people like Byrd and Rockefeller would still be there now. Would they be for C&T ? One might say, “why not ?” Again, you presume that somehow there’d be accountability on behalf of these two, and how would that be when their Democrat hacks and cronies (whose party has controlled the body without interruption for 8 decades), would be in charge of the legislature and decides who goes to DC ?