From Grok: “Under the original U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 3), U.S. Senators were chosen by their state legislatures, not by direct popular vote. This design was deliberate: the framers wanted the Senate to represent the states as sovereign entities in the federal system, acting as a more deliberative, stable check on the directly elected House of Representatives (which was always meant to be the “people’s house”).
• Senators served six-year terms (staggered so only one-third were up for election every two years).
• State legislatures picked them, often through joint sessions or votes.
• The idea was to insulate the Senate from short-term popular passions and give state governments a direct voice in federal policy.
This system lasted from 1789 until 1913, when the 17th Amendment was ratified. It changed the text to: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof…” (with provisions for governors to make temporary appointments if needed).
Why the change happened
Progressives and reformers at the time argued that indirect election led to corruption, deadlocks in state legislatures (sometimes leaving seats vacant for years), and undue influence by party machines or big business. Direct election was sold as more democratic.
Relevance to Boebert’s tweet
Boebert’s post (“Why do so many Senate Republicans hate their own voters?”) is venting frustration that many GOP senators seem to resist aggressive Trump-aligned priorities (e.g., the recent stalling of reconciliation/budget fights over the “anti-weaponization” fund, immigration enforcement, etc.). Your point highlights a structural reality: senators were never originally designed to be direct mouthpieces of “the voters” in the same way House members are. The pre-17th Amendment system tied them more closely to state-level political institutions and legislatures, which some conservatives today argue better protected federalism and prevented the Senate from becoming just another populist body beholden to national donors, media, or special interests.
Critics of the 17th Amendment (including some modern conservative groups) say the switch helped turn senators into national celebrities who chase big-money fundraising and D.C. insider status rather than faithfully representing their states’ interests. Supporters counter that it reduced corruption and made the Senate more accountable to ordinary people.
So in the context of Boebert’s complaint, your observation is spot-on: the Senate’s original design was intentionally less about chasing the immediate whims of the electorate and more about state sovereignty. Whether that makes today’s senators “out of touch” or properly insulated is the ongoing debate.“
@RebeccaSlatkin If you avoid tall grass and brush I think you will be okay.
My dog used to lay down on the lawn so not sure how you would completely avoid it unless you regularly burn your yard .
@ScubaKim13 They had tolls back in the day for the bridges .
Some towns in NH have blocked beaches to only locals so it is possible . Not sure how you would enforce that on a state road if that is a state road.
@connor_mc_d I am not sure that is as bad as not having Closed Captions enabled or using default Zoom CC which are not great or using the laptop microphone which is terrible .