4 ms·

It's interesting to see that this article doesn't mention the House of Representatives at all. The entire purpose of the Senate is to balance the power of the

It's interesting to see that this article doesn't mention the House of Representatives at all. The entire purpose of the Senate is to balance the power of the House, to mitigate states with large populations overpowering states with smaller populations.

strict9 8y ago
Correct, that was the purpose devised about 230 years ago. I don't have a strong opinion on this aspect of representation in elected federal government, but at point do we accept that structures have become suboptimal for a vastly changed country and society?
- juliangoldsmith 8y ago
  >at point do we accept that structures have become suboptimal for a vastly changed country and society? How does that relate to the dissolution of a body meant to protect the interests of the minority?
rmah 8y ago
The entire purpose of the Senate was not balance the power of the House, it was to provide states with representation in the federal government. To such end, in the original constitution state governments chose senators -- because the senators represented the individual states -- not the people of those states. Then the 17th Amendment changed all that and made senators elected by popular votes just like the house members. This, IMO, eliminated the primary reason for having a Senate at all (to represent states). It now simply (poorly) duplicates the same purpose of the House (to represent the people).
- mr_cyborg 8y ago
  One could make the argument that the senators still represent the state, because they represent everyone in the state, whereas a representative only represents their district.
  - burfog 8y ago
    The difference shows up in things like unfunded mandates. An appointed senate would resist demanding that states pay money. Voting for such a thing would likely get the senator rejected by the state government, preventing another term. In general, appointed senators were a force to keep government smaller.
- juliangoldsmith 8y ago
  The Senate was created to serve both purposes. I'd recommend reading up on the Connecticut Compromise [0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Compromise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Compromise
dragonwriter 8y ago
> The entire purpose of the Senate is to balance the power of the House The entire purpose of the Senate was to protect slavery, the same as granting slave states extra House seats based on 3/5 of their enslaved population, the same as building the electoral college on top of the representation formulas for those institutions, and the same as writing express protections for the international slave trade into the Constitution. That slavery was a looming conflict and that democratic representation doomed it over time was both clear at the time of the Constitution and, if not sufficiently mitigated, a deal-breaker for the slave-reliant states.
- juliangoldsmith 8y ago
  >The entire purpose of the Senate was to protect slavery Given that Delaware was the state that proposed it, that seems unlikely.

strict9 8y ago

Correct, that was the purpose devised about 230 years ago. I don't have a strong opinion on this aspect of representation in elected federal government, but at point do we accept that structures have become suboptimal for a vastly changed country and society?

juliangoldsmith 8y ago
>at point do we accept that structures have become suboptimal for a vastly changed country and society? How does that relate to the dissolution of a body meant to protect the interests of the minority?

rmah 8y ago

The entire purpose of the Senate was not balance the power of the House, it was to provide states with representation in the federal government. To such end, in the original constitution state governments chose senators -- because the senators represented the individual states -- not the people of those states. Then the 17th Amendment changed all that and made senators elected by popular votes just like the house members. This, IMO, eliminated the primary reason for having a Senate at all (to represent states). It now simply (poorly) duplicates the same purpose of the House (to represent the people).

mr_cyborg 8y ago
One could make the argument that the senators still represent the state, because they represent everyone in the state, whereas a representative only represents their district.
- burfog 8y ago
  The difference shows up in things like unfunded mandates. An appointed senate would resist demanding that states pay money. Voting for such a thing would likely get the senator rejected by the state government, preventing another term. In general, appointed senators were a force to keep government smaller.
juliangoldsmith 8y ago
The Senate was created to serve both purposes. I'd recommend reading up on the Connecticut Compromise [0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Compromise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Compromise

dragonwriter 8y ago

> The entire purpose of the Senate is to balance the power of the House The entire purpose of the Senate was to protect slavery, the same as granting slave states extra House seats based on 3/5 of their enslaved population, the same as building the electoral college on top of the representation formulas for those institutions, and the same as writing express protections for the international slave trade into the Constitution. That slavery was a looming conflict and that democratic representation doomed it over time was both clear at the time of the Constitution and, if not sufficiently mitigated, a deal-breaker for the slave-reliant states.

juliangoldsmith 8y ago
>The entire purpose of the Senate was to protect slavery Given that Delaware was the state that proposed it, that seems unlikely.