Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Should US Senators No Longer Be Elected by Popular Vote?
U.S. Senators should no longer be elected by popular vote.
As it stands, we effectively have two Houses of Representatives. This is redundant and unnecessary.
The popular vote has little no value in determining the general outcome of the elections.
States have no voice in the national government, breaking federalism.
This would help to "localize" the national government by giving power to representatives that are closer to the local level.
Fighting in the Senate would be reduced, as Senators would be more like agents of the 50 states. They would be directed by their states, to act in the best interest of each state.
Abandoning the direct election of senators would magnify the impact of aggressive gerrymandering.
Choosing Senators by way of legislatures make State elections very complicated. Changing a single Senator becomes a matter of changing the makeup of an entire State legislature.
People would feel they had less representation in their government.
State legislatures picking Senators leads to corruption.
When we used state legislature selection of Senators, some seats went unfilled while state officials argued over who should fill the seat.
There are more timely and important issues to tackle in our modern society than procedural matters such as this.
Should US Colleges Allow Concealed Carry?
Should Supreme Court justices be elected?
Is Popular Protest Productive?