Replies

yes!!

How did the 17th amendment change the way Senators are elected?

The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution was ratified in 1913

State Legislatures, who were expert in the state's business, and who kept day to day tabs on the state's representatives to the Federal government, were the one's who the founding fathers had elect the Senators. This relationship protected the state's interests against the Federal government's interests.

The 17th amendment did away with that working relationship and made 'the people' responsible for keeping tabs on the federal reps also. (But it did not change the length of the senator's terms. Who can keep track of what these guys are doing for 6 years?)

This amendment has resulted in, as the framers predicted, a national government with influence, power and control unchecked by any political mechanism.

The original U.S. Constitution gave state governments a strong voice in the national government by requiring them to select U.S. Senators - to serve much like ambassadors today at the United Nations - and thus created the U.S. Congress to be a political (not judicial) venue for the competition between state government interests and national government interests.

Consider that those in state government claim a responsibility to address questions in the areas of taxation, education, employment, disaster relief, public safety, transportation, health care, marriage, and property rights, to name but a few. Yet all of those issues, and far more, are now primarily mandated, regulated, or directed out of Washington, DC, far away from the people being impacted by those policies. While the state governments bear much of the responsibility for their citizens, they have only secondary authority to do anything about the issues they face. When federal courts decline, as they frequently do, to interpret the 10th Amendment as protecting the sovereignty of states, without a voice in the U.S. Senate the states have no recourse. Repealing the 17th would address this deficiency.