Term limits for Congress would (in my opinion) go a long way toward eliminating lobbying, graft, pork barrel politics, and sleazy back-room deals. That's why it is nearly impossible to implement such a thing.
Congressional Terms & Benefits: A Proposed Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Declaration of Independence II. There is a symbiotic relationship between the fabulously wealthy and our politicians-for-life. The political establishment, both Republicans and Democrats, use taxpayer money to fund special interests in return for kickbacks in the form of campaign funding and other benefits to remain permanent fixtures in Washington, D.C. Politicians buy votes with our money, then steal our wallets, then repeat the process. It is not capitalism, but socialism for the wealthy. Unfortunately, our permanent politicians are starting to run out of our money.
Lies, Compromise, and Reptiles. In his 2010 State of the Union address, the president was critical of the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC. "I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities." The last time I checked, candidates from both major parties gladly accepted donations from "America's most powerful interests," and seem to have no compunctions about continuing the practice.
Breaking the Incumbent Protection Rackets. In a typical election today, the average turnover of congressional seats unrelated to voluntary retirement is under ten percent, sometimes far less. Turnover in 2000 was only three percent. Despite what incumbents claim, in most cycles, elections simply are not effective term limits. Once having created professional legislators, or a "Congress for Life" career path, Congress found it necessary to protect incumbency.
Term limits are far from dead . Term limits ceased to be a practical political possibility when the 1994 Republican congressional majority failed to fulfill their Contract with America promise on the issue, right? Wrong on both counts. The GOP Congress did vote on the issue, but the vote was rigged to insure that no concrete progress was achieved. And term limits, which continue to enjoy massive public support in 2010, CAN become a reality despite the previous setback.
Term limits: It's baaack! It seems inevitable, in retrospect — that the anti-incumbent spirit at work among voters this year would lead to a resurrection of the term limits movement that was last heard from in the 1990s (but never really went away).
It's Term Limits or Certain Slow Death for America. Most, if not all, the grief, antagonism, misconduct, lies, corruption, cheating, intimidation, bribery, and other ailments short of hang-nails and diarrhea on the political scene here in our country can be solved by doing just ONE thing: Pass TERM LIMITS. Unfortunately, it can only be done with Congress' cooperation. ... It will require a truly honorable Congress overwhelmingly dedicated to making our country stronger and less prevalent to the urges of greed and self enriching.
In God We Trust... In Government? Not So Much. By using a vague, collective term such as "government," we give the individual legislators, administrators, regulators, and millions of drones in the government who both actually cause our problems and are the cause of our distrust a free pass. Many people believe that we could solve part of this dilemma through the passage of a term limits amendment. But why do we need one? Every two years we get a chance to replace every member of the House and a third of the Senate. Within a six-year span, every House member, every senator, the president, the entire cabinet, and thousands of senior appointed officials could be gone.
New Republicans catch term-limit fever. In what appears to be a breath of life for the moribund term limits movement, roughly half of the 80-plus Republican House freshmen — and a handful of the newly elected GOP senators — have promised to limit their congressional tenures, with some even promising support for new term limits legislation.
Retirement age: The painful realities of the oldest Congress in history. In February 2009, 83-year-old Rep. John Dingell, Michigan Democrat, became the longest-serving House member in history. In November, 92-year-old Sen. Robert Byrd, West Virginia Democrat, became the longest-serving member of Congress, period. And it's not just those two. This is the oldest Congress measured by its average age since records have been kept.
A Cancer In The Capitol Is Killing Us. America, it's time to clean house in this government and throw all of the sanctimonious tyrants out. It's time to replace every single one of them and then demand that their successors legislate term limits on both the House and the Senate, just like they do for the president. Never again should anyone be allowed to make a lifetime career of public office in Congress. The temptation for corruption is just too compelling to resist over extended periods of time. The consequences of this tradition should now be painfully obvious to anyone.
How to skew the news without really trying. As columnist Jill Stewart notes, "disingenuous reporters hate … term limits because reporters must woo new legislators every eight years, working their butts off for leaks and cell phone numbers." Journalism depends on access. Term limits, by making old cultivated sources of access irrelevant every few terms, make reporters work harder. Why would they want that?
Term Limits: An Idea Built on Solid Ground: Career politicians don't like the idea of a periodic stimulus to electoral competition. Advantages of incumbency that result in mere token (or even zero) electoral opposition in a district are just fine with them.
Coming to Terms With Term Limits. The issue is term limits. When people first began making a case for them, I was completely opposed. I felt that if the voters were happy with their elected officials, it was only right they be free to keep re-electing them. I have completely reversed my position. For one thing, I have come to believe that incumbents have far too great an advantage over their challengers. These days, I don't want any of them — even those few I actually approve of — staying in office for more than a few years.
Solving Whose Problem? No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems — of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
Time's Up, Big Daddy. A South Carolina senator has introduced a constitutional amendment that would set congressional term limits. It should carry the image of a certain West Virginia senator who's been in Washington far too long. Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, the amendment's sponsor, is correct when he says "real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians."
Time to resurrect the term limits movement. Why must the importance of issues that impact our daily lives, and what they portend for our progeny, be degraded by relating them to the personal desires of our duly elected representatives to retain their access to cushy benefits and the perks of power? Are not the ramifications to our collective interests of national fiscal responsibility, defense of our country, energy independence, and health care policy more important than the career longevity of our congressmen?
The case for judicial term limits. The deal that pulled the Senate back from the brink of a shootout over judicial nominations this week didn't really settle anything. Democrats retain the right to filibuster future nominees "under extraordinary circumstances" — a phrase it is left to them to define. … Odds are the deal will collapse as soon as the next vacancy opens up on the Supreme Court.
Benching the judges: Term limits aren't just for the U.S. President and legislatures in 15 states. They deserve to be extended, even to the Supreme Court. Why? … Partisan rancor in the U.S. Senate is dangerously high; add the issue of selecting federal judgeships, especially to the High Court and for a life term, and you reach meltdown.
King Bloomberg. When Mayor Bloomberg deployed his vast personal and political power to overturn the term limits law, he began to demystify the public relations image he had purchased at considerable expense. It was only then that New Yorkers began to recognize the danger of making Gotham's wealthiest man its chief executive. That recognition is the reason his approval rating slipped by nine points in the latest Marist poll. The public chose a mayor; they didn't expect an elected monarch.
The open secret — who runs the show? The legislative staffs at the federal level as well as in the states have far more power than it is polite to talk about. Usually, politicians fear bringing the subject up. They don't want us to realize how much they rely upon their professional staffs to keep cranking out their never-ending batches of half-baked legislation. They only bring it up when they have to: when a goofy provision just seems too goofy even for Congress. Or when their careers are threatened with term limits.
The sleaziest ballot measure in America. Are voters stupid? The Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce and the city's League of Women Voters apparently think so. Both groups are pushing Proposition R on L.A.'s ballot next Tuesday. Prop R is the ultimate test of whether the slick power elite in the City of Angels can fool the people into voting to weaken the city's eight-year term limits law by not telling voters what the measure actually does … by pretending that it "establishes" term limits already established.
Back to the top of this page
Over to The Editorial Page for the overflow from this and other pages.
Back to the Home page
