Two key Senators who haven’t announced reelection plans leave questions about their future unanswered.

  • markr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I looked, I could find nothing under ‘duties of senators’ that referenced ‘representing your constituents’. They don’t. They represent their states. There is another legislative body, the House of Representatives, that side represents people. It’s a fucked up system.

      • markr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ok. Meanwhile there is no oath that senators take that requires them to represent the people of their state. And further, as I pointed out, the senate does not represent people, it represents states. It was explicitly set up this way, and until 1913 senators were appointed by the states, not elected at all.

        • Zoolander@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I literally posted the text of the oath they take. Their duties include representation of their constituents. The US is a representative democracy. Even when legislatures elected the Senate representatives, they legislatures were still elected. You’re revising the history of how our country was set up.

          • markr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Please provide a link to the official duties of senators that includes ‘representing the people of their state’.

            I agree that the US is generally a form of representative democracy, however the senate explicitly represents the states, not the people within the states, and always has. The fact that senators are equally allocated per state, rather than by population, with each state, regardless of population have the same number of senators does not support the theory that it is a representative democratic institution. The intention was explicitly to maintain the power of the individual states within a federation.

            • Zoolander@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              That makes no sense. What is a “state” except for the people who vote in that state? States don’t have agency and don’t make decisions or provide directives so the people within them elect representatives to carry out their view of how the government should be run. The separation between the house and Senate is simply to counteract the voting power of more populous areas vs more rural areas, just like the electoral college.