Yes.
Let's pause, step back, and take an even broader view.
The Framers' system relied on institutional checks (not a bill of rights) to secure our freedoms. A Senate of the states checked the whims of the peoples' House, and each of the three branches within the government had organic power to check each other, with little recourse from the other branches.
IOW the Framers also relied on force, in the form of distinct institutions that relied on the pride and ambition of individual men within them to protect our liberty. It is counter-intuitive, but the Framers' relied on man's self-interest, his vice, to do good.
Today, the institutional checks of the constitution have been replaced with two political parties. We assume the GOP exists to check the rats. By this, when pubbies win, our freedoms are supposed to be secure, and at risk when the rats win. Republican freedom should never hinge on the outcome of a single election, for if it does, it isn't really freedom, but rather benevolence from the occupant of the White House.
With only two opposing forces operating from one location, Washington DC, their once distinct goals have morphed into one. Their mutual purpose is to retain power. Losing an election doesn't equate with losing all power and wealth, it just means a little less than the party in power.
Freedom cannot depend on the power split between two self serving political parties, and the kindness of a President.
Until power is once again further divided vertically between fifty states and the federal government they created, there is no hope for the restoration of freedom.
/rant
I think it would be great if a retiring Republican Senator would start a campaign to return the right to elect Senators to the individual state governments as a way to reduce corruption in the federal government.
Ideally, that lame-duck Senator would offer zesty, detailed criticism of the corruption that our current system has wrought — starting with Dirty Harry and all of Harry’s illegally “raised” millions.
It needs to be someone whom Harry could not “punish”...