by Michael Muskal
A group of Republican senators has revived the traditional remedy for dealing with an elected government reluctant to leave: Impose term limits.
Term limits date from the days of the Colonies and have had mixed results. Often, the individual in office matters less than the continuation of party control. Still, at least 36 states have some sort of limits, usually on governors; at least 15 limit legislatures. On the federal level, there is a limit on the number of terms the president can serve but none on lawmakers' terms.
Despite their history, the effectiveness of term limits is unclear. Many argue that limits strengthen staff and create a powerful, long-lasting government of appointed officials. Some contend that they actually weaken legislators, left with less time to get up to speed on key issues and gain influence as leaders among heir peers.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced the current proposed constitutional amendment that would limit congressmen to no more than three terms and senators to no more than two. The measure is supported by fellow Republicans Sens. Tom Coburn, of Oklahoma; Kay Bailey Hutchison, of Texas (now in her third term); and Sam Brownback, of Kansas.
Any such action is a long way off.
The measure requires two-thirds approval in each house then must be ratified by three-quarters of the states, a process that could take years, if ever.
The new proposal echoes a 1990s GOP proposal that never got anywhere even though Republicans won control of Congress in 1994. With Democrats now in charge, passage by two-thirds is even less likely.
See the full report on the new Republican initiative iat DC Now.
Comments
If term limits would limit the amount of partianship in Washington then it should become law quickly.
I, for one, am tired of all of the bickering and one upmanship that exists at the current time!
Posted by: Pat H | November 11, 2009 12:43 PM
What the Hey! OUTSTANDING IDEA! The Republicans should all have term limits and should only be able to serve one year in that term! Remember the republicans never do anything for this country they only do things to this country! whiteagle38
Posted by: Raymond L. Juneau | November 11, 2009 1:06 PM
The principal problem with Congress is the lack of term limits. Some of these members have been in office -- due to gerry-mandering of districts -- for more than 45 years! If term limits are appropriate for presidents (and they are), then surely they are important for members of Congress, in order to bring in new perspectives and new ideas. Thanks only to the opposition of Democrats and the interference of liberal judges, term limits for Congress do not exist, even though a vast majority of the public wants them and even, in many states, has voted overwhelmingly for them. Yes, term limits would improve Congress. With an approval rating of only 22 percent, any improvement would be welcome.
Posted by: Danforth | November 11, 2009 1:49 PM
Rhetoric you can belive in. No wait . . . Rhetoric you can believe in?!?!?!??!
Posted by: Bobby Mobbie | November 11, 2009 2:59 PM
Here we go again with the GOP looking backwards.
It's no surprise that the GOPer's want term limits now days.
Only 20% Identify As Republicans, Lowest Since 1983
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/fewer-people-identify-as_n_326971.html
Posted by: former Republican | November 11, 2009 2:59 PM
I think we can pretty much count on this amendment going nowhere. Not only is it a Republican retread, it was a widely ignored retread back in the 1990s, as many of the Republicans who first ran in 1994 on term-limit pledges promptly broke them once they got a taste of power and there's little doubt things would be any different this time.
But the bigger issue here is this: If the Republican party wishes to be taken seriously again and not be called a party of No ideas, they not only need ideas, they need NEW ideas. Dusting off discarded and discredited policies from the failed Gingrich era and presenting them as new and spiffy is not a NEW idea.
Back to the drawing board, Repugs. A lot of us have 1990s nostalgia, but we still have to live in the present.
Posted by: Steven VK | November 11, 2009 3:12 PM
We already have term limits. They are called elections. Don't want to leave office, do things that are popular. It's quite simple. Americans toss out Republicans because their ideas are harmful. That's why Democrats keep going back to Congress.
Posted by: sensible | November 11, 2009 5:13 PM
Demint should lead by example and immediately resign from his senate seat!!
First, DeMint's an idiot, anyone have time to compile a list of Repub members of Congress who would be out of a job under a term limits law?
Except that I'm sure there would be a grandfathering clause for the current Republican office holders, so, really, it's just more rank hypocrisy from the Party of Know Nothing.
.
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/store/2009-07/winners/party-of-no_larger.jpg
.
Posted by: Annie | November 11, 2009 5:15 PM
I am unconvinced that imposing term limits is a good idea. We have term limits on every elective office here in California except for the Judiciary. What we’ve seen is that legislators who are termed out of office tend to act less responsively and accountably to the wishes of their constituents in their final term. What do they have to lose if they can’t get re-elected? They simply vote according to their political ideology rather than out of concern for the public good.
.
There are other problems with term limits. In the event the public finds a good and trustworthy public servant with a track record of competence and expertise (okay, just humor me here), the services of that individual are forever lost when his or her last term is up. By definition, term limits cut off the right of the public to have their voices heard through elected officials of their choosing. In either case, term limits would thwart the desire of the public to be represented by trusted legislators.
.
I think there is a better way than term limits to keep politicians honest and responsible, namely: a recall procedure. The threat of removal by the public is certainly good motivation for a politician to stay working for the voting public. Why doesn’t someone propose an amendment that authorizes the recall of a Senator or Representative if more people in the politician’s home state or district vote for the recall than voted for the politician in the first place? It is possible to do, you know. We successfully booted one governor that way.
Posted by: John W. | November 11, 2009 6:23 PM
Wonderful!. its about time. I am in favor of term limits, without any bias towards either party. I say down with "Career" politicians. And as far as I'm concerned anyone that holds public office and gets caught with their hands in the cookie jar and get convicted of wrong doing, then they should forfeit any pension monies they would have had coming. Its time to clean up Washington and the rest of the political world, A good start would be to eliminate all Lobbyists.
Posted by: Paul | November 11, 2009 6:32 PM
With Tom Coburn's anti-veterans agenda on the rampage, who the freak would believe anything even associated with this clown.
Posted by: Darin | November 11, 2009 9:21 PM
If the republicons really wanted to do something to reform elections and promote better government, they would sponsor a bill to end corporate donations to candidates and their campaigns and limit all contributions from all sources.
America is where it is today in part because big business interersts have bought our lawmakers.
Posted by: writerofwrongs | November 11, 2009 11:46 PM
They, the Grand Olde Zombie Party, are not serious of course. (See Contract on America, Newt G.) This is hilarious.
Posted by: C.Morris✧ | November 12, 2009 7:56 AM
Thanks only to the opposition of Democrats and the interference of liberal judges, term limits for Congress do not existééé
Posted by: Danforth | November 11, 2009 1:49 PM
Yo, memory loss wingnut, you guys had control of Congress back in '94 and some of your own wingnuts proposed this same idea, and yet all those wingnuts couldnt pass it. You blame everything on the liberals but selectively forget your own party did the same thing. Republicans = Hypocrites.
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | November 12, 2009 9:06 AM
Posted by: John W. | November 11, 2009 6:23 PM
Total agreement. Putting term limits on our eleceted officials doesnt seem very democratic if you ask me. I'm against the 22nd amendment as well. If our forefathers wanted Presidential term limits they would have included it in the Constituion from the get go. I am also for the populare vote not electorate.
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | November 12, 2009 9:12 AM
BTW, I am against term limits.
Elections are the way to go.
Posted by: C.Morris✧ | November 12, 2009 2:38 PM