Congressman Backs Bill to Repeal 17th Amendment, End Senatorial Elections
U.S. Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA-10) has cosponsored a joint resolution introduced this week that proposes repealing the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and returning the selection of U.S. Senators to state legislatures.
On June 25, 2026, Rep. Keith Self (R-TX-03) introduced H.J. Res. 198 in the House of Representatives. The measure, referred to the House Judiciary Committee, is cosponsored by Perry and seven other Republicans: Reps. Eric Burlison (MO-07), Andrew Clyde (GA-09), Paul Gosar (AZ-09), Andy Harris (MD-01), Clay Higgins (LA-03), Sheri Biggs (SC-03), and Michael Cloud (TX-27).
The resolution proposes a new constitutional amendment stating simply: “The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution is hereby repealed.” It includes a savings clause ensuring the change would not affect the election or term of any senator chosen before the amendment takes effect. Repeal would require two-thirds approval in both the House and Senate, followed by ratification by conventions in three-fourths of the states within a proposed 10-year window.
Historical Context
The 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913 during the Progressive Era, replaced the original constitutional method under Article I, Section 3, in which state legislatures elected U.S. Senators. For the first 124 years of the republic, senators were chosen by state lawmakers, creating a direct link between the Senate and state governments. Supporters of repeal argue this structure made the Senate a deliberate check on federal power and a protector of state sovereignty, while the House represented the people directly.
Critics of the current system contend that direct popular election has turned Senate races into expensive, nationally focused contests dominated by big money, special interests, and candidates more attuned to Washington ambitions than state priorities. They say the change has contributed to the centralization of power in the federal government.
Proponents’ Arguments
In announcing the resolution, Self said the current system has produced “six-year politicians more focused on national ambitions and the institution of the U.S. Senate than on the states they serve.” He added that the Founders designed the Senate “to protect state sovereignty and act as a check on federal overreach,” and that repealing the amendment would “restore that constitutional balance.”
Cosponsor Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) called the 17th Amendment “arguably the most injurious amendment in history,” arguing that “big money has twisted our Senate races into circus acts.” Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) stated that the amendment “weakened that connection and shifted more power to Washington insiders and special interests.” Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO) linked the change, along with the 16th Amendment, to the long-term growth of federal power and debt.
The introduction comes amid visible tensions between House and Senate Republicans over stalled legislation, including efforts to advance voter identification requirements, highlighting broader frustrations among some conservatives with the Senate’s institutional role and legislative pace.
Critics’ Perspective
Opponents describe the effort as an attempt to roll back more than a century of direct democracy. They note that pre-1913 Senate selections were often marred by deadlocks, lengthy vacancies, and allegations of corruption and influence-peddling within state legislatures. Direct election, they argue, made senators more accountable to voters and reduced the power of political machines and wealthy interests operating behind closed doors in state capitals.
Media coverage in Pennsylvania has framed Perry’s involvement as support for a plan that would “strip voters of their right to elect U.S. Senators.”
Outlook
H.J. Res. 198 faces steep odds. No serious legislative push to repeal the 17th Amendment has advanced in Congress in modern times, and any constitutional amendment requires supermajorities at both the federal and state levels. The resolution appears intended primarily to spark debate over federalism, the original constitutional design, and the Senate’s place in the federal system.
Perry, a consistent conservative voice in the House, has not issued a separate public statement on the measure beyond his cosponsorship. The effort underscores continued interest among some Republican lawmakers in structural changes aimed at strengthening state authority relative to Washington.
