Should the House of Lords be elected?

It could be argued that, yes, the House of Lords should be elected because it would make parliament more democratic. One may suggest that an unelected chamber has no place in a modern democracy therefore needs to be changed. Also, the current method of selecting Lords could be deemed wholly unfair (especially given the recent 'cash for honours' scandel in 2007). As well as this, it would give the public greater representation, possibly more access points to the government and more chance for political participation - hence enhacing our democracy. On the other hand, however, an elected House of Lords may cause problems. These potential problems are proven in the USA, who currently have two elected chambers, and include gridlock. This means that, as both houses are elected, it's harder to force legislation upon the other - leading to a slower legislation process. As well as this, we would risk implementing a 'democratic overload' on the public which may lead to lower turnout and therefore a less democratic state overall. It can also be argued that the current Lords are specialists in their field and therefore putting this decision to the public may lead to a loss of this expertise as they wouldn't understand who is best equipped for the job.