An alternative to the 17th Amendment

[Joe Republic]

I'll admit that I'm not a very enthusiastic fan of the existing 17th Amendment, as it removes the direct link between state and federal governments.  It also turns the Senate into nothing more than a slightly altered copy of the House.

However, a good argument in favor of direct election of senators is the expansion of accountability to the people.  Therefore, how about this (albeit slightly convoluted) compromise alternative?

The state legislatures vote for various Senate candidates, and the winner of a plurality then faces the electorate for an up-or-down approval vote.  If a candidate wins both elections, they obviously become the senator.  If they fail the popular election, the state legislature must vote for alternative candidates, with the failed candidate having been eliminated.

If there is a deadlock, the state governor may appoint an interim senator until a replacement is elected.

Thoughts?

[Emsworth]

This seems to be an interesting idea. However, I think that this method could be very complicated and very expensive. If the people reject the state legislature's nominee, then the state would have to hold multiple elections, which would cost a lot of money and take up a lot of time. Furthermore, I feel that this method gives the Governor too much power, especially if there is a deadlock between the legislature and the people, or a deadlock between the two houses of the legislature.

[Joe Republic]

I'll agree with it being potentially complicated and expensive.  But as for the governor having too much power in the case of a deadlock, at least the state will still be sending a representative from the state government.  And also, the governor him/herself is personally accountable to the entire state electorate anyway.

[Emsworth]

... at least the state will still be sending a representative from the state government.

I see your point, but I would argue that someone elected by the people  represents a state just as much as someone elected by the government.

[A18]

Right, but who is going to stand up for local self-government? The state government, or the people of the state?

[Erc]

I'd certainly support having Senatorial candidates be chosen by a State Legislature caucus---but that's a party matter.

[Joe Republic]

I'd certainly support having Senatorial candidates be chosen by a State Legislature caucus---but that's a party matter.

I know that I've already said I oppose the 17th, but given the choice between letting the people decide or leaving it to a party boss in a smoke-filled room, I'd go with the former.