Utah wants nationwide bill to pass that would eliminate you being able to vote for your senator

[episodic]

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3435123

Utah wants to pass a bill that would allow the legislature to 'appoint' senators.



Quoted from the article
"We know more than voters do," Valentine said.



How can this possibly pass? What are the motivations of this? Sheesh, could we even claim to be a democracy if this passed? I find the statement I quoted above highly disturbing. I can tell you, I don't need to be 'taken care of' at the polls.

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: episodic
http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3435123

Utah wants to pass a bill that would allow the legislature to 'appoint' senators.



Quoted from the article
"We know more than voters do," Valentine said.



How can this possibly pass? What are the motivations of this? Sheesh, could we even claim to be a democracy if this passed? I find the statement I quoted above highly disturbing. I can tell you, I don't need to be 'taken care of' at the polls.

Not surprising--most of them are beholden to corporate interests, not the voting populace who they perceive as being peeons.

 

[techs]

That is how it used to be done before the passing of the 17th amendment to the Constitution.
Needs a another Constitutional amendment to be changed.
Chances?
0

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: techs
That is how it used to be done before the passing of the 17th amendment to the Constitution.
Needs a another Constitutional amendment to be changed.
Chances?
0

you'er correct tech. Senators originally were never selected by tghe people, but by the legislatrues of the states. This was done to act as sort of a check on the House whose members were popularly elected and may hold the interests of their consituents above that of the country in certain cases.

Sorta a brake on voting in bread and circus's. Unfortunaltely, we are now at that stage where voting such things is normal. Look at the recent transportation bill with all those earmarks/pork ~ 200 billion I think was the figure.

Anyway, it's amazing how many respond to a posting and do not have an inkling of the constitution. Our education system in full glory -- sarcasm intended.

 

[RichardE]

Could be a good thing, if they are not elected, they do not have to worry about voting with there consituents, and could rather vote for what is right. As well, you would more or less get rid of people donating money to political fundraising, if you are apointed you do not need to politic.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: episodic
Sheesh, could we even claim to be a democracy if this passed?

We aren't a democracy. Never were and never will be. Even if this bill was passed, it wouldn't change the fact that we aren't a democracy.

 

[shira]

I don't agree with this legislation, but the thread title and OP have mischaracterized it. The description in that article is:

SB156 . . . would allow legislators to pick Senate candidates, as long as the political parties agreed

So voters wouldn't be able to vote for a senator in the primary elections. But they'd still be able to vote in the actual, final election.

 

[Meuge]

I think that we should just eliminate elections altogether, and have Dick Cheney appoint every member of the government. He knows best.

 

[Genx87]

Hey now I kind of like the old way of doing it because it held the local govts responsible for the jackass who was sent to DC. It is also very possible with local events that the turnover rate in DC would be much higher depending on how the local elections went.
And finally it would make the state elections much more interesting as it would have national effects for the voters.

The way it is setup now is basically an annuity program for anybody who is in congress. Once you are in, you really have to screw it up to get kicked out.