Final answer:
Increased filibusters and partisan division during the Obama administration led to a legislative gridlock that hindered progress on crucial issues like economic reforms. The Seventeenth Amendment, enabling direct election of Senators, was a response to previous indirect election issues but didn't resolve ongoing political contention.
Step-by-step explanation:
During the Obama administration, political gridlock was prominent due to intense partisan divisions, particularly between a Democratic President and a Republican-controlled House. The Senate, despite having a slight Democratic majority, was hampered by an increase in filibusters and other obstructionist tactics. As a result, legislative progress on pressing issues such as economic reforms during The Great Recession was severely impeded. This deadlock reflected historical patterns where polarized politics and weak presidential mandates have led to legislative inaction. For example, governors and other officials could be caught in unforeseen crises which exhausted their resources, further complicating policymaking.
The passage of the Seventeenth Amendment was a response to the issues arising from indirect elections of Senators by state legislatures, which were believed to weaken the nation's democratic processes. This amendment enabled direct election of Senators, aiming to create a more accountable and responsive legislative body and reduce the influence of party politics in senatorial elections. Despite this change, political contention still remained a significant obstacle for governance.