Question

He Seventeenth Amendment to the US Constitution calls for the direct election of all US Senators. This means that the people of each state get to vote to decide who will be their two US Senators. Before this, the legislatures of each state chose the two US Senators from that state with no direct involvement of the average voter.
Why would this amendment be considered a reform? How would it benefit the people?
Even today some people claim that the Seventeenth Amendment was a bad idea. What arguments could be made for reverting selection of US Senators back to the state legislatures?

Answer 1

The seventeenth amendment is a reform, since it raises a change in the way senators are elected in each state.

The Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Amendment XVII) establishes the direct election of the United States Senate by popular vote. The amendment replaces Article I, Section 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the constitution, under which the Senate was elected by the State Legislatures. It also alters the method of filling vacancies in the Senate, to be consistent with the method of choice. It was adopted in April 1913.

This form of election is very beneficial for the people, since they are the ones who directly choose the senators that represent them.

Some people will say that this form of election is a bad idea, since the elected senators could be from a political party opposed to the one that bovierna in the state at that time, and therefore could be difficult communication. In this way these people prefer that the senators are elected by the legislature of each state, in order to ensure a fluid and more harmonious communication.