[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for 3 years, with maximum of 3 terms lifetime

I agree that, as a practical matter, we'll never stop popular election of senators. And I agree that the six-year term is not sacrosanct.

I would however propose that the compromise solution is to make the senators' term 8 years and make him/her run as the runningmate of the governor. Alternatively you could make the senator's term 4 years, followed by four years' term to be filled by the governor (or, if he isn't available, his appointee). Either way, the gubernatorial election is what determines the senator. Especially in the latter version, the governor unambiguously becomes influential in the Senate. It doesn't give the state legislature a voice, but it does link the Senate to the state government in the person of the governor, who has the incentive to opppose unfunded mandates and so forth.

But in cases of impeachment of PotUS I would prefer that the governors be the 'peers' of the president who sit in judgement. I wonder how many governors would have accepted x42 standards of conduct for executive office?

[Political Junkie Too]

I would however propose that the compromise solution is to make the senators' term 8 years and make him/her run as the runningmate of the governor. Alternatively you could make the senator's term 4 years, followed by four years' term to be filled by the governor (or, if he isn't available, his appointee). Either way, the gubernatorial election is what determines the senator.

The main objection I have with this is the distinct difference between the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch. I don't think you want to tie them together, and I think there would be Constitutional issues (both federal and state) with separation of powers if you tie the selection of one branch to the other branch's success at the polls.

I assume that the intent of the Framers was that the state legislatures would send one of their own (presumably experienced in the art of debate and legislation) to the Senate. The role of an executive is different than that of a legislator, and it should take a body of legislators to select their federal representative.

-PJ

[The Bronze Titan]

- "I would however propose that the compromise solution is to make the senators' term 8 years and make him/her run as the runningmate of the governor. Alternatively you could make the senator's term 4 years, followed by four years' term to be filled by the governor (or, if he isn't available, his appointee). Either way, the gubernatorial election is what determines the senator. Especially in the latter version, the governor unambiguously becomes influential in the Senate. It doesn't give the state legislature a voice, but it does link the Senate to the state government in the person of the governor, who has the incentive to opppose unfunded mandates and so forth.

I see your point ('States' interests more forcefully represented directly in the Federal legislative body) by having the Senate legislators tied to the Governorships.

My only hesitation is the 8 year term - too long for so much power. I would lean to 4 year terms.

6 years is definitely too long in today's world. The decision-making and activity process (yes 'deliberation' as well) can be accomplished very efficiently in much less time than the 6 years originally established by the Founders.

Remember, it took several days to get correspondece between the colonies to the capital back then (it takes seconds today). No wonder they needed 6 years to deliberate.