Parties cross state boundaries, and people within a state are of many parties. Those in a state of the opposite party will say they feel unrepresented, while others will say that people outside their state are influencing what goes in within their state.
It's party bloc politics that drives the Senate these days, because it's the parties that fund 33 of the most expensive elections that occur every two years. Repeal the 17th amendment, and we repeal the massive transfer of wealth from parties to Senate candidates. Just like we've seen with the Obamacare power grab of 1/6th of the national economy, it's the control of money that drives power politics. If we can dry up the spigot of campaign cash from parties to candidates, we can dry up much of the power that parties exert on us.
Senators would have to spend more time representing the people of their states, either directly or through their state legislatures. They would have to work towards getting their people to vote for sympathetic state house candidates, so those legislators can vote to send the Senator back to Congress.
This kind of Senator would be less inclined to align with an imperial president, and more inclined to side with their state in opposition to an imperial president.
-PJ
<>Senators do not represent the “the people of their states,” but rather, the people of their parties.<>
An excellent distinction!