HomeNewsAnalysisThe Senate, Then Not And Then

The Senate, Then Not And Then

Author

Date

Recently The Augusta Press reported on a lawsuit from a fellow Columbia countian attempting to set aside the election of Senators John Ossoff and Raphael Warnock on the grounds that Georgia had never ratified the 17th Amendment. That is the amendment which requires popular election of U.S. senators...

Subscription Needed

You will need a subscription to The Augusta Press to view this content. Log in below OR subscribe.

Comment Policy

The Augusta Press encourages and welcomes reader comments; however, we request this be done in a respectful manner, and we retain the discretion to determine which comments violate our comment policy. We also reserve the right to hide, remove and/or not allow your comments to be posted. 

The types of comments not allowed on our site include: 

  • Threats of harm or violence 
  • Profanity, obscenity, or vulgarity, including images of or links to such material 
  • Racist comments  
  • Victim shaming and/or blaming 
  • Name calling and/or personal attacks; 
  • Comments whose main purpose are to sell a product or promote commercial websites or services; 
  • Comments that infringe on copyrights; 
  • Spam comments, such as the same comment posted repeatedly on a profile. 

5 COMMENTS

  1. This is an excellent article. The country was never meant to be a democracy and the Founders and Framers knew that nearly every country in history had committed suicide. The word “democracy” is not found in any Founding documents. The House was looked upon as sort of a passion pit of the people and the Senate was were things were slowed and more level headed. It is said that either Washington or Jefferson said the senate was the saucer where legislation went to cool.

    I’ve heard one of the reasons for changing was that some of the states couldn’t agree on whom to select for senator and the state would have no full complement in the Senate. But, I think the main reason for the change was the big push for democracy that the Progressive Era was wallowing in.

    The good thing about having the senators selected by the legislatures is they represented the interests of the states. There is a conflict at time between what the people want and what is in the best interest of the state. The people may want something that could really put the state in a financial bind. When senators were selected by the state they would come back and report and discuss with the state legislatures what was going on and get their desires because they worked for the legislatures.

    The selection by the legislatures was a great compromise and the 17th Amendment is one of the most detrimental toward republicanism that has been passed and ratified and I would love to see it repealed.

    What would the make up of the Senate be today? There are 30 states with both houses controlled by Republicans, two non-partisan (NE) , and one split (MN). That would mean a minimum of 60 Republican and a maximum of 63 Republican senators. As one can see, the Democrats are not excited about repealing of the 17th Amendment.

Recent posts