House of Representatives vs. Senate?

Question

Why exactly does the House only get to serve 2 years, but the Senate gets to serve 6? And please don't put, "because the Senate is more higher than the House. I would like an answer that would not go against the Constitution. As in, what exactly were they thinking when they wrote it...

I knew adding Constitution would bite me in the butt....i meant that...it doesn't say they both are equal...thats all... and yes I'm aware...it doesn't say they AREN'T equal either..

Answer 1

The Senate was most lilely designed to be a house of professional politicians. That is why most of the Presidential appolintments are made pending the "advice and counsel of the Senate."

The House was definitely intended to be made of citizen legislators and the founding fathers never envisioned a system of professional politicians.

Keep in mind the House was part time and wasn't intended to meet everyday, they had only a few sessions their first several terms. The founding fathers established a central government with limited powers, they did not intend for the overreaching powers the modern government has.

Answer 2

I believe the House is a more direct representation of the people's wishes because every 2 years they must have the support to be elected. Senators, however, are almost seen as judges and have a term longer than the president's....their record is more spread out and viewed by the people in a wider way....their re-election is not always determined by current events, but by their total record.

At first the House was a rowdy place of fist fights, not just verbal attacks, because senators serve 6 years, they tended to be more the academics

Answer 3

The division between the two houses was a compromise (like many others within the Constitution). In the new leadership of the United States, there were two major factions: Jefferson & Madison's faction, which advocated a populist government, and Adams & Hamilton's faction that advocated for rule of an American elite class. In the end, the compromise saw a short-term House fashioned on populist notions (control over spending, power to declare wars, impeachment of officials) and a Senate based upon elites (who approved appointments, served as judge & jury for impeachments, and ratified treaties).

The House, as the populist part of Congress, was meant to reflect changing attitudes and politics quickly, and keep the other branches in check by holding the purse strings and threatening impeachment if anyone got out of line. The Senate was meant to be a place for old established politicos to be appointed by states, and given prestige and some power after a lifetime of service to their individual state.

The Progressive Movement is responsible for the amendment which changed the Senate to direct elections by the People -- many Senators were being given what was called "a task-less thanks" by strongly entrenched parties in state assemblies, and often tasked by national parties to overthrow legislation dealing with social justice and labor rights. Thus the thinking of the Senate became more of what it is today: a longer-term service with the ability to shape long-term policy.

Answer 4

because the founders wanted the senate to be able to deliberate without fear or constant elections- the house was to be closer to public opinion. That's why the Senate was originally appointed by the state legislatures. (and 1912 is right)

By the way, the Constitution NEVER gives reasons. those are in other writings. The constitution is just the law, not the explanations.

And the Senate was considered the higher house- not much more power, but certainly better regarded and charged with more critical duties.

Answer 5

The Senate gives each state equal representation, so the founding fathers decided to give them 6 year terms. They wanted senators to be representatives who did not have to keep campaigning and couls focus onthe issues for at least 5 out of 6 years. The House is based on population which at first changed very often, as people move West, so the founding fathers decided to give them 2 year terms. People in the House have to campaign more often.

Answer 6

Originally, Senators were appointed by the state governments. The Senate was to be the more stable, deliberate house of congress. The House of Representatives was meant to represent the people directly, and change often to keep that representation fresh and accurate. The Senate is still the more staid and stable house, due to their longer terms, but since 1913 (17th amendment) the senators have been elected directly by the people.

Answer 7

My Guess? is that the founders were looking at the British government and they have the House of Lords and the House of Commons. While they did not want a royal government, they felt that the two houses worked well. The house of Lords preexisted the House of Commons but they both go back to the 14th Century

Answer 8

The actual framers believed that by making the terms of a senator longer, he, because it was always a he back then, would have a greater degree of job security; therefore he would be less subject to pressures of public opinion and special interests and would be more willing to vote for his constituents. Keep in mind that the representatives are more focused on their own set of constituents while senators are focusing more on a big picture of national interest.

You're welcome.

Answer 9

The house is supposed to represent the immediate will of the people - they are basically always campaigning so they have to pay attention to what their constituents want *right now*.

The senate is more deliberative. Senators are supposed to be free of the need to pander to public opinion, and to therefore be wiser and think longer-term about issues.

Answer 10

My teacher nknows this answer but umm check on google.com