One of the few reasonable Democrats has come out for repealing the 17th Amendment, something I have been advocating for years. His argument:
[Sen. Zell] Miller, who is retiring in January, was first appointed to his post in 2000 after the death of Paul Coverdell. He said Wednesday that rescinding the 17th Amendment, which declared that senators should be elected, would increase the power of state governments and reduce the influence of Washington special interests."The individuals are not so much at fault as the rotten and decaying foundation of what is no longer a republic," Miller said on the Senate floor. "It is the system that stinks. And it's only going to get worse because that perfect balance our brilliant Founding Fathers put in place in 1787 no longer exists."
I agree. The original intent of the Framers was that the House would be a body that reflected the immediate desires of "the people" while the Senate was a sort of political filter which would tend to smooth out the the emotional responses and decide what was in the long-term interests of the country.
As such, Senators were appointed by state legislatures, not elected. In such a system, Senators would not have to be responsive to those who fund their campaigns and they would not feel it necessary to "bring home the bacon" in the form of Congressional pork.
So let me again add my voice to those who say "Repeal the 17th Amendment" along with Sen. Miller.
