Welcome to The Senate Site

By Howard Stephenson
Senator, District 11

Article I Section 3 Clause 1 of the Constitution states:

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

This process was chosen as a part of the Great Compromise in 1787 to ensure that checks and balances exist within our government: by having the state legislature elect senators to the upper house of the national congress this measure balanced the populist tendencies of the direct election of members to the House of Representatives. As officials are most accountable to those bodies that elect them, the intent was to ensure that focus on legislating for the States as whole and sovereign bodies rather than conducting broad and overreaching national programs that intruded upon the rights of the States.

This long-standing method came to end in 1911 with the passage of the Amendment XVII. It amended the Constitution to allow U.S. Senators to be selected by a direct, general election of the public at large. This turned out to be a far reaching shift in the balance of elected offices in the context of federalism. While the passage of Amend. XVII not only had the effect of putting Senators in a more direct, responsive relationship with the average citizen, it also limited the all too often corrupt influence Senators could exercise over the local races in their home state.

These laudable impacts are, however, outweighed by that which was sacrificed in the process: a vital link of cooperation and mutual responsibility between the Federal Government and State Legislatures. Today, rather than national Senators exercising undue influence over the election of state offices, national Senators appear to be too little interested in the needs of their respective States and their governing bodies. The misuse of the TARP and ARRA funds, lined and laced from one end to the other with pork-barrel projects and private Washington gamesmanship, is only the most recent in a “long train of abuses and usurpations.” Many of these projects are either blatantly unnecessary or simply unwanted by the states that they were so graciously “bestowed” upon—namely without their consent. Direct elections, far from making U.S. Senators more responsive to their constituents, appear to have actually distanced them from their duties.

A full scale repeal of the long entrenched Amendment would be inefficient and a reactionary measure at best. Rather than alter a well-established process of elections, why not reexamine giving the people new guards and securities against the responsibilities of their officials? Senate Bill 250 is designed to restore the efficacy of checks and balances between Utah and her federal officials. This bill will allow political parties to consult with their respective members of the Utah House of Representatives and Senate on the job performance of the Senators in Washington. Parties will then be better informed as to how the Federal Delegation is representing the State and that they pursue Federal policies that work in the best interest for the citizens of Utah. We all know that regular reporting by an outside observer—just as in auditing—keeps an agent honest towards his principal, and that is the principle at work in SB 250.

S.B. 250 will allow a political party to establish bylaws . . .

(1) . . . in order to rate and evaluate their elected legislators both in the state and nationally.

(2) . . . whereby members could rate their state senators and state representatives.

(3) . . . in order to rate and evaluate their national senators generally, as well as specifically regarding their performance and position on the state’s rights.

(4) . . . in order to rate candidates for the United States’ Senate races.

2 Comments:

 Andrew said...

States didn't want ARRA funds Sen. Stephenson? Really? Then why are so many begging for a second round to bail them out again.

If Utah really didn't want any of the money, why didn't they simply reject it? You can pass all of the meaningless Carl Wimmer resolutions that you want, but until you stop taking the money, all of your states rights malarkey will be in vain.

Utah voters are mature enough to judge how good are Senators are. We don't need your help. The state legislature is just as clueless as the Congress.

Even though your legislation didn't grant me any authority to do this, I grade this idea a "D" for dumb.

3/10/2010 1:13 PM  

 Anonymous said...

This might recover an inch of the miles of ground lost by states in amendment XVII.

A full scale repeal of amendment XVII is inefficient and reactionary??? Go for the jugular.

Bailouts and heathcare takeovers by the out of touch federales aren't ineficient and reactionary?

3/18/2010 10:04 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Twitter Updates

Follow @UtahSenate on Twitter