Perhaps you are right about this, tdadams. In all probability, the present SCOTUS would see it that way. (A good many of the sitting justices appear to be "doctrinal" rather than "dynamic" thinkers.)
But I was thinking of what the Framers were trying to do here. I don't believe they thought that, in the Constitution, they were laying down rigid, "one-size-fits-all" rules, done once and forevermore; for they knew that future circumstances were bound to change, and the foundational law of the land had to be flexible enough to adapt, within broad constitutional parameters.
They did say "Congress may by general Laws prescribe the manner...and the Effect...." Looks to me like the Framers did intend Congress to have some constitutional discretion here.
And don't forget, at the time Article IV was written, Congress was divided into the people's house (the Legislature) and the other house, which then represented state governments. (That all changed with the 17th Amendment, which caused the Senate to be elected popularly, rather than appointed by state legislatures.) So the several states were definitely directly part of the consultation on the "may", the "by general laws prescribe", and the "effect" -- at least at that time.
Thanks for writing and sharing your views.
Not to knit pick, but like forlorn wishes for an anachronistic interpretation of states rights (without regard for how we have to function as a People) it seems to me that many of us classic liberals see magical effects in a reversal of the 17th Amendment. Seems to me that if we returned to that, we would get even more party machine Senators than we have now (which was probably the reason for the 17th Amendment in the first place). I don't see how Illinois would have sent Senator Peter Fitzgerald to Washington under the old system! We don't need more money/patronage enabled party hacks in Congress; we need fewer.
Our founders stated clearly that our Constitutional Republic could not survive without virtue. The problem is that the society/culture that elects our representatives and from which come the judiciary is morally depraved. After the Constitutional Convention, when asked by an inquirer what type of govt had been formed, Franklin replied, "A republic if you can keep it" - these words were quite wise and prescient. Adams said that our "Constitution was written for a moral and religious people and is inadequate for the government of any other." Washington said that morality and religion (Christianity) are "indispensible supports" to a free society. Clearly, our nation is founded on the principle of self government wherein each individual's actions are restrained by his/her conscience as that conscience is directed by a Holy God. In today's reprobate society, restraint has been cast aside. Unless God shows mercy and there is a spiritual awakening, the greatest form of govt in world history will be finished. I am not optimistic at all about the outcome, but I know I must pray more and continue to fulfill my moral obligations as a citizen.