Before Texas Gives Up Its Vote, Keith Self’s Proposal Deserves Tough Questions

Opinion By R.J. Morales | TX3DNews

Congressman Keith Self has introduced one of the most consequential proposals of his time in office—not a bill on border security, taxes or inflation, but a constitutional amendment that would end the direct election of U.S. senators.

The proposal faces long odds. Amending the Constitution is intentionally difficult. But that’s not what makes it newsworthy.

It asks Texans to rethink a right they’ve exercised for more than a century, and it raises questions that deserve more attention than they’ve received.

More Than a History Lesson

Self says repealing the 17th Amendment would restore the Constitution’s original design by making senators accountable to the states rather than directly to voters. That is a legitimate constitutional argument.

But history alone isn’t enough to justify changing the Constitution. The real question is whether Texans would have a stronger voice under the proposed system than they do today.

The Accountability Question

Earlier this year, Republican voters denied John Cornyn renomination and chose Ken Paxton as the party’s Senate nominee. Whether that was the right decision isn’t the point. The point is that voters—not politicians—held a U.S. senator accountable.

Under Self’s proposal, they wouldn’t. Instead of answering directly to millions of Texans at the ballot box, senators would answer first to the legislators responsible for selecting them.

Supporters believe that would make senators more accountable to the states. Critics argue it would make them less accountable to the people. Before changing the Constitution, Texans deserve to know why shifting that accountability from voters to legislators is a better system.

The Contradiction

Self recently criticized the U.S. Senate for “defying the will of the American people” by refusing to pass the SAVE Act. That’s the tension at the heart of this proposal.

If the problem is that senators aren’t listening to the people who elected them, his solution isn’t to make senators more accountable to those voters. His solution is to take those voters out of choosing senators altogether. Instead of asking how senators can better answer to the people, the proposal asks whether the people should continue choosing senators in the first place.

Supporters believe returning that responsibility to state legislatures would strengthen federalism and restore the Constitution’s original design. But it raises a fair question: if the Senate has become less responsive to the will of the people, how does reducing the people’s role in choosing senators strengthen that voice?

What Does This Mean for TX-03?

There are only two U.S. senators representing nearly 32 million Texans. Those two people vote to confirm Supreme Court justices, approve federal judges, confirm cabinet secretaries and help decide laws on taxes, border security, healthcare and countless other issues that affect families across TX-03.

That’s what makes this debate different. This isn’t about choosing another state representative or county commissioner. It’s about deciding who should have the final say over two of the most powerful elected offices in Texas.

For more than a century, that decision has belonged to Texas voters. If that changes, TX-03 voters should ask whether they’re comfortable letting the Texas Legislature make one of the biggest political decisions they’ll no longer make themselves.

Questions for Both Sides

Self has proposed changing how Texans choose one of only two people who represent the entire state in the U.S. Senate. That makes it fair to ask supporters a simple question: how does moving that decision from millions of voters to the Texas Legislature give Texans a stronger voice?

Opponents should answer a question too. If political control of the Texas Legislature shifted tomorrow, would this still be the wrong system—or does the answer depend on which party benefits?

Before Changing the Constitution

Self has every right to argue that repealing the 17th Amendment would create a better system of government. But constitutional amendments aren’t ordinary bills. They ask Americans to reconsider the basic rules of how they are governed.

At a time when many families across TX-03 are focused on the rising cost of living, homeowners insurance, property taxes, border security and the affordability of everyday life, it’s fair to ask why changing the way Texans elect their U.S. senators has become a constitutional priority.

Before Texans set aside a right they’ve exercised for more than a century, that’s the case that still needs to be made.