It was reaching critical mass by the end of the 19th century that the public wished to vote on their Senators. The members had been seen as corrupt, representing special interests (specific industries, to which said Senator would often have personal stake in), and you had frequent attempts of vote-buying of legislators, some under the table, some far more audacious.
It was no grand conspiracy by the left to overturn the Founders, it was an angry public fed up with an elitist and corrupted body. The state legislators recognized that and ratified the 17th one by one.
For those that think the body would miraculously return to having statesmen of the caliber of Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, John C. Calhoun, et al, are going to be in for a shock. You wouldn’t even be able to get Ted Cruz into the Senate today. You’d have even bigger moonbats from Democrat states, utterly insulated from the public, and you’d have RINO hacks (think Graham of SC) from Republican ones. Texas would have Karl Rove and David Dewhurst as its Senators today.
My question would be is that any different than it is today? And wouldn’t the change in information transmission throughout society serve to temper the extremist Senators?
Addendum:
Also, from the list of respondents, read the commentary of Mr. Dave Loduca, as he truly sets the issues in proper focus
My question would be is that any different than it is today? And wouldn’t the change in information transmission throughout society serve to temper the extremist Senators?