Regarding democracy, I think you are assuming that citizens will vote according to what is constitutional and what is best for society. Look around - that clearly is not the case. Many millions of Americans sit around doing nothing while a shrinking number of taxpayers subsidize their existence.
Most of these no- or low-information voters have no clue about constitutional issues, economics, treaties, national security, and so on; and only vote based on their own personal and immediate interests.
When a society has a significant percentage of voters that don’t know or don’t care what happens to anyone else, they vote for politicians that won’t follow the laws that govern our society. Remember, true democracy is a group of wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner... that is what is occurring politically today.
That is why we are a constitutional republic and not a democracy - because the Founders wanted to prevent THIS from happening.
No, I'm well aware that citizens routinely elect horrible politicians. I am outvoted by my liberal neighbors all the time. What I am assuming, however, is that OVERALL, citizens will make better choices than career politicians would when it comes to selecting Senators. This doesn't mean every Senator they elect will be great constitutional giants. What it does mean is that you will see a handful of solid tea party types elected to the Senate, whereas you are unlikely to ever see such individuals appointed to the Senate by politicians.
>> Look around - that clearly is not the case. Many millions of Americans sit around doing nothing while a shrinking number of taxpayers subsidize their existence. <<
Your argument fits my state legislature to a tee. The vast majority of them are lazy political hacks who sit around doing nothing by a shrinking number of taxpayers subsidize their existence. While half the public collects government goodies, 100% of state politicians collect government goodies. These are the people you want appointing my Senator.
>> Remember, true democracy is a group of wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner... that is what is occurring politically today. <<
Nobody is arguing that because the people have the right to vote for the U.S. Senate, they should have absolute power to do WHATEVER they want by simple majority. The only ones screaming about that insane scenario is you "abolish the 17th amendment" types, and your argument makes as much sense as arguing that the UK is "in danger" of the Queen getting absolute power of her citizens as long as they have a monarchy. Look around you and the Democrats shoving Obamacare down our throats despite the VAST majority of Americans opposing it, or imposing gay marriage with activist judges when the PEOPLE of a state are overwhelmingly against it -- we the people have less and less power over our government, NOT the other way around.
>> That is why we are a constitutional republic and not a democracy - because the Founders wanted to prevent THIS from happening. <<
We are a democratic constitutional republic, which means that millions of ordinary Americans are able to directly vote on all sorts of matters across the country, whether it's recalling governors, passing propositions in Califoria to cut off goodies for illegal aliens and preserve traditional marriage, amending state constitutions, throwing out bad Congressman and Senators, removing judges, electing delegates to national party conventions, and abolishing state agencies. If the founders wanted to PREVENT this from having and create a "Republic, not a democracy", they would have created a North Korean style government where the politicians appoint whoever they want to serve in the federal government and the citizens have absolutely no say whatsoever in the process. If you think that system is preferable, you are welcome to move to such a country.
Your staunch opposition of the repeal - full of logical fallacies, an absence of reason, and plenty of emotional elitism - has led me to the conclusion that you are happy with the current situation. Is that the case?
You may portray senators - prior to the 17th Amendment’s passage - as corrupt elitists, but you ignore or chose not to address the fact that since today’s senators are elected by the people that they are somehow less corrupt. Throughout 5,000 years of human history, politicians have proven themselves to be corrupt elitists. Instead of halting corruption, the 17th Amendment opened the door to far more corruption. Once the states no longer had representation and U.S. senators no longer had to answer to the states, the size of the federal government exploded and the budget grew exponentially.
Words like democracy sound wonderful and from a psychological aspect are quite effective (although misleading in this case), but we now have 100 years of history to examine. The 17th Amendment is not a suicide pact and should be re-examined to determine whether it is the best path forward for a more prosperous society.