5 ms·
There's no clear argument for why direct-election became so popular. There were mostly vague arguments given such as direct-election would somehow fight against
by adammichaelc 16y ago
There's no clear argument for why direct-election became so popular. There were mostly vague arguments given such as direct-election would somehow fight against the cozy relationships between industry and the Senate, or end bribery in Senatorial politics.[1]
It seems that what was behind the movement to the popular vote was a strong populist sentiment without clear reason; or at least without a reason that made sense.[1]
Last I checked, bribery and cozy industry relationships in the Senate were not stopped by the 17th amendment. I doubt they will ever stop. Power and money tend to mingle, and that part of human nature will probably never go away.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...
- klbarry 16y agoThere are some strong arguments that a senate operating behind closed doors would be more effective at ignoring special interests and working together than otherwise. The writers of the constitution did just this (they swore secrecy of anything they talked about in the convention to avoid voter backlash) [1] This is why they initially wanted health care debates behind closed doors - the lobbyists can make much more use of transparency than the uninterested voter can. Fareed Zakaria wrote a lot about this in The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. [A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution by Carol Berkin]
- anigbrowl 16y agoThis shouldn't be downvoted just because it's disagreed with: it's a cogent and well-sourced argument, which should be met with a rebuttal rather than silent disapproval.