Population-Based Democracy Vs. Area-Based Democracy- (Part Six) Term Of A Member In The United States Senate

Population-Based Democracy Vs. Area-Based Democracy-(Part Six) Term Of A Member In The United States Senate

Since the upper house of the federal legislature is based on the Area-Based Democratic Model, the term its members serve should be more than the members of the lower house of the federal legislature. After all, a member of the upper house (The US Senate) is supposed to interact with their constituents much less frequently and less directly than a member of the lower house (House Of Representatives).

However, the term a US Senator serves should not be three times the term of a US Representative. Six years is too long a term for a federal upper house member to serve. That member (US Senator) becomes too aloof from the needs of their constituents, from the stated objectives of the US Constitution, and the ideals of the Founding Fathers . Too long of a term will cause that federal upper house member to substitute their own individual will instead. 

When any branch of government does too little for the People and their system of laws and policies, either individually or collectively, tyranny always is a byproduct.

A term that is too long term also means campaign donors have disproportionate influences over the activities of the elected officeholders. A longer than needed term gives an officeholder excessive and undue authority. Campaign donors are apt to invest in that.

A term that is too long will limit proper competition. Even if there are proper public platforms for candidates to express their views to their vote bank, a lesser number of properly qualified individuals will seek candidacy to an office in the federal upper house if he/she realizes they have to wait a longer than needed time to run for that specific office again in case he/she loses in that election for that specific office. A longer than needed term only strengthens the incumbency, the status quo.

The term of a member of the United States Senate should be decreased from its current six years to five years. A member will have time to settle in and try to achieve the objectives that he or she campaigned on and at the same time not be too direct democratic. Lessening a US Senator's term by one year will bring those elected officeholders closer to the People without subjecting them to the "Winds Of Populism". 

The Representatives of the federal lower chamber are supposed to carry out the "Populist Agenda". The Senators in the federal upper chamber are supposed to be detached from that "Populist Agenda" and instead utilize cold-hard objectivity in upholding US Constitutional confines that serve the ideals of the People. 

Cliff Notes Version: The term for a federal senator should be decreased from six to five years. The Representatives of the federal lower chamber are supposed to carry out the "Populist Agenda". The Senators in the federal upper chamber are supposed to be detached from that "Populist Agenda" and instead utilize cold-hard objectivity in upholding US Constitutional dictates that serve the ideals of the People.