On The Senate
Repealing the 17th Amendment to Revive Statesmanship and Federalism
The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principles on which it was founded. —Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws
The framers of the United States Constitution envisioned a bicameral legislature that balanced the popular will with deliberative, state-centered governance. The House of Representatives would reflect the passions and interests of the people, while the Senate, appointed by state legislatures, would act as a stabilizing force, ensuring the sovereignty of the states and tempering populism. However, the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913, fundamentally altered this balance by establishing the direct election of Senators. While intended to address corruption and inefficiency in the appointment process, the amendment inadvertently undermined the Senate’s original purpose, fostering partisanship and disconnecting Senators from the states they represent.
This essay argues that repealing the 17th Amendment is essential to restoring the Senate’s role as a deliberative body rooted in federalism. By addressing concerns about corruption through modern tools like blockchain technology and fostering a cultural emphasis on statesmanship, we can revitalize the institution. The restoration of the Senate’s original design is not a nostalgic return to tradition but a necessary reform to meet the challenges of modern governance with integrity and purpose.
The Founders’ Vision for the Senate
The framers designed the Senate as a body distinct from the House of Representatives in both function and composition. While the House was to be a direct expression of the people’s will, the Senate was intended to represent the interests of state governments. By appointing Senators through state legislatures, the framers ensured that the Senate would serve as a check on both federal overreach and populist excesses.
This design reflected a belief in the need for an aristocratic element in governance—a deliberative body composed of individuals capable of long-term thinking and insulated from transient political pressures. As James Madison explained in The Federalist Papers, the Senate would “protect the people against their own temporary errors and delusions.” This indirect method of selection also emphasized the principle of subsidiarity, allowing states to exercise their authority within a federal framework.
However, the 17th Amendment fundamentally altered this structure, eroding the balance of federalism and undermining the Senate’s distinct purpose. The shift to direct elections made Senators more beholden to national political parties and special interests, diminishing their accountability to state governments.
The Problems of the 17th Amendment
The ratification of the 17th Amendment was driven by concerns about corruption, deadlocks in state legislatures, and a growing progressive movement advocating for greater democratic participation. While these concerns were valid, the unintended consequences of the amendment have been profound.
Rise of Partisanship and Populism:
• Direct elections incentivize Senators to prioritize national party agendas and reelection campaigns over the interests of their states. This has contributed to increased partisanship and the erosion of the Senate’s deliberative nature.
Disconnect from State Governments:
• Senators are no longer accountable to state legislatures, weakening the connection between state and federal governance. This disconnect undermines the role of the Senate as a guardian of state sovereignty.
Diminished Differentiation from the House:
• By aligning Senators with popular elections, the Senate has become more similar to the House of Representatives, losing its unique role as a stabilizing force.
Aristocracy and the Need for Stability
The Senate’s original design implicitly acknowledged the value of an aristocratic element in governance—not in the sense of inherited titles but in the cultivation of individuals with virtue, education, and a long-term commitment to public service. Today’s political landscape, however, often prioritizes wealth, fame, and short-term gain over substantive leadership.
Many contemporary politicians come from humble backgrounds, which, while admirable, can lead to a focus on personal advancement rather than statesmanship. Historically, Senators with aristocratic sensibilities—whether by birth, education, or character—demonstrated a capacity for long-term thinking and an ability to prioritize the common good over partisan interests. Restoring the Senate’s original design could revive this spirit of statesmanship, encouraging a class of leaders committed to deliberation and the broader interests of the Republic.
Concerns with Repealing the 17th Amendment
Critics of repealing the 17th Amendment often cite the issues that plagued the pre-17th Amendment Senate, including corruption, bribery, and legislative deadlock. These concerns are valid, but they are not insurmountable. Modern governance tools and ethical reforms can address these challenges, creating a more transparent and accountable system.
Corruption and Bribery:
• Pre-17th Amendment corruption often stemmed from a lack of transparency in the legislative appointment process. With today’s technology, this issue can be mitigated.
Deadlocks in State Legislatures:
• Legislative gridlock, while a concern, can be addressed through mechanisms such as automatic deadlines and runoff votes.
Democratic Participation:
• Critics argue that direct elections are more democratic. However, a balance between direct democracy and federalism is essential to preserving the Republic’s stability.
Modern Solutions to Safeguard the Process
To address these historical concerns, modern tools like blockchain technology can provide unprecedented transparency and accountability in the Senate appointment process.
Blockchain for Financial Transparency:
• Contributions to state legislators and Senate candidates could be recorded on a public blockchain ledger, ensuring that all financial transactions are transparent and immutable.
• Smart contracts could enforce campaign finance laws, automatically rejecting illegal contributions.
Public and Transparent Processes:
• Open votes and public hearings in state legislatures could ensure accountability and reduce opportunities for backroom deals.
Ethics Oversight:
• Independent commissions could monitor the appointment process, investigating claims of misconduct and enforcing ethical standards.
The Role of Culture and Institutions in Producing Statesmen
Beyond structural reforms, cultivating statesmanship requires a cultural and institutional commitment to virtue and leadership. Universities, religious organizations, and civic institutions play a critical role in fostering the character and values necessary for effective governance. By emphasizing education, civic engagement, and public service, these institutions can complement a reformed Senate in producing leaders who prioritize the common good.
The Future of the Senate and Federalism
Repealing the 17th Amendment would restore the Senate’s role as a guardian of federalism, ensuring that state governments have a direct voice in federal policymaking. This reform would not only strengthen the balance of power between states and the federal government but also encourage a more deliberative and statesmanlike approach to governance.
By combining structural reforms with modern transparency tools and a renewed cultural emphasis on virtue, we can create a Senate that reflects the Founders’ vision while addressing the challenges of contemporary politics.
In Sum
The 17th Amendment’s shift to direct elections fundamentally altered the Senate’s role, undermining its purpose as a deliberative body rooted in state sovereignty and federalism. While concerns about corruption and inefficiency drove its ratification, these issues can be addressed through modern tools like blockchain technology and ethical oversight.
Repealing the 17th Amendment is not merely a return to tradition; it is a forward-looking reform aimed at restoring balance, integrity, and statesmanship to the Senate. By embracing this change, we can revitalize the Senate as a stabilizing force for the Republic, ensuring that it serves the interests of the states and the long-term good of the nation.
The welfare of the people is the ultimate law. (Salus populi suprema lex esto) —Cicero, De Legibus