The 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?

The United States did not directly vote for senators during the first 125 years of the federal government. The Constitution, which was adopted in 1788, declared senators elected by state legislatures. The first proposal to amend the constitution and elect senators by popular vote was presented in the House of Representatives in 1826, but the idea did not receive enough support until the 19th century, when several problems related to elections in the Senate became evident. . . Several state laws were paralyzed by the elections of the senators, which made Senate seats remain vacant for months and even years. In other cases, the political machines gained control over state laws and the senators elected with their support were seen as puppets. In addition, the Senate was perceived as the "millionaire's club". That is public service. The rise of the Popular Party, called the Populist Party, motivated the creation of a Senate more responsible to the public.

The Seventeenth The Constitution of the United States (XVII) 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.

- "the past is made of multitudinous items ranging from anything that can be collected, recollected or assessed to originate in the past. as such, the past is a gallimaufry of particulars that may not have been related in any way. however, the human mind seeks organization to understand concepts and other things. the human mind therefore seeks relationships in explaining and studying the past. history being a humanity, dictates that historians have to serve this human trait by bringing structure to details of the past. historians do this by creating interpretive frameworks that capture as many details as possible."

< 3