i'm now inclined to believe...

[acroyear]

...that though the problems of Senatorial life-long membership in the late 1800s were real, the 17th Amendment was not the best solution.  The senate today no longer represents the states and creates a forum where the states can argue their cases.  The senate is just another body representing the people, almost redundant to the House.

A senator can not accurately reflect the true concerns of his state's government if he is not of the same party and mind.  Today, when a state goverment has a grievance with the federal level, rather than have their appointed senator bring the issue up, they have to personally appear before the HOUSE to get the ball rolling.  This is not how it was designed.

Comments

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

making matter worse are statements like this:

"Consumers across the country deserve a single set of science-based food warning requirements, not the confusing patchwork that we have today," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.

When a politician (either party - i'm not going to pick on the Reps exclusively this time ;-) ) says they thing something should be "science-based", as far as I'm concerned they're lying until they prove otherwise. Usually, "sound science" as used by politicians means evidence so overwhelming that the lawsuit has already been won - in other words, science proven not within the scientific community, but within the court of law - the only forum they understand besides media manipulation.