Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Rep. Ron DeSantis introduced a constitutional amendment on Tuesday that would impose term limits on members of Congress, following through on their December announcement about the proposal.
“D.C. is broken,” Cruz said in a statement Tuesday evening. “The American people resoundingly agreed on Election Day, and President-elect Donald Trump has committed to putting government back to work for the American people. It is well past time to put an end to the cronyism and deceit that has transformed Washington into a graveyard of good intentions.”
The proposal would limit senators to two terms (12 years total) and representatives to three terms (six years total). President-elect Trump campaigned on reining in Congress by implementing term limits, though it is unclear if the incoming administration has been involved in the proposal, which comes during Congress’ first week in session this year.
Both Cruz and DeSantis are Republicans.
“President Trump, Speaker Ryan and huge majorities of the American people are demanding term limits,” said U.S. Term Limits President Philip Blumel. “Congress must listen and pass the Cruz-DeSantis amendment immediately.”
A Rasmussen Reports survey from October found three-quarters of Americans supported implementing term limits, while 13 percent did not.
The amendment was co-sponsored by Republican Sens. Deb Fischer of Nebraska, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah and David Perdue of Georgia.
Cruz has supported other bills to reform the political process, including ending super PACs, lifting caps on individual contributions and centralizing the campaign finance system. Cruz and Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., introduced the SuperPAC Elimination Act of 2017 last year to remove caps on individual contributions.
One of the very few things I agree with regarding Ted. This definitely should be passed without question. Amendment 28 would include this and more.
This would/will be an especially tough Amendment to get through.
Both Congress and then the States.
Way too many powerful ruling powers and interests would be negatively affected by it to get the large majorities in Congress and the States needed to pass it.
Agree! Can’t see politicians voting themselves out of a job. Not going to happen.
How about something easier, repeal the 17th!
Totally agree, unfortunately.
I would be happier if the simply understood the sentiments outlined within the articles of the Constitution such as that the Posse Comitatus act does not apply to the scourge invasion into the United States.
Another amendment that the Communist party do not understand the details of very well is the https://eaglerising.com/63352/the-14th-amendment-did-not-bestow-citizenship-on-illegals/
the Deep State won’t stand for this, it would require the power brokers to buy politicians more often…
Why would you lift caps on individual contributions? The process would still be controlled by the rich.
Dems are going to complain because, republicans.
You’re being played people. You know there is no way a constitutional amendment will be attempted. Ted Cruz knows it’s not going to happen. The other supporters of the amendment know it’s never going to happen. Introducing/supporting such a thing makes everybody look good with no actual danger of it happening. Nothing to see here………..move along.
Unfortunately, I think that Indentured Servant above is correct. This smells like Ted trying to garner some sort of momentum that he could use upon his next campaign ie: “Ted Cruz fought the democrats for you dear voter”.
I would say repeal the 16th amendment (The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on the United States Census.), and repeal the Federal Reserve act, and term limits would be unnecessary. Starve the beast. Until I hear something out of these asshats along those lines, the rest is just…. yawn.
Trump could force a vote on it, then they’d have to go on the record with their votes. I’d love to see it – the fucking weasels. In case anyone chirps up that “we already have term limits – just vote them out”, I’ll preemptively reply that the problem isn’t just MY representative (although he is a problem) – it’s that I want YOUR representative ousted. The seniority system gives more power to the lifers in Congress. Even if my state or your state acted nobly to vote out a cad, we can’t do anything about voters in places like West Virginia where the voters – quite logically – elected Robert Byrd senator for 50 years so that he could bring the pork home to WV.
The President isn’t a part of the amendment process, there is no role he can play in it.
It’s an entirely Congressional and State action taking place without Executive or Judicial participation in it.
I think I read a statistic which showed that 93 to 95% of Federal and state elections are won by the candidates with the bigger war chest spent–usually incumbents.
I agree but in my case I live near NYC, I definitely want everyone in my districts and statewide out.
Was my immediate thought also–draw up a bill that the public will love you for but that has a snowball’s chance of passing. Well played Senor Cruz.
WIP, the only law we need regarding political campaign contributions is to require each campaign to publish an ongoing current list of who has contributed how much to who. It would be key to have a very short timeframe specified, so that those who are seeking to buy influence are known.
I believe that revulsion over the large amount by which the Clinton campaign war chest exceeded Trump’s was one of many factors in her defeat. Looking over the wreckage of the Clinton campaign, it appears clear that money cannot always buy elections.
I’m curious… Call me skeptical, but if it’s a big club & we ain’t in it what difference will term limits really make? I’m sure the guy who’s worried about upending Guam can be replaced by someone equally as insipid without much trouble. Other than this latest general election, $$ usually decides who wins the race. So what’s to stop the people who pull the strings from buying elections for their new puppet every few years? They would be spending the $$ anyway. Is it all smoke & mirrors at the dog & pony show?
Something meaningful like removing the salaries & perks of those serving might do more. Ya know, like it was way back when we had “gentleman” politicians who also had regular jobs/careers. But then… them that aspire to power really cant be trusted with it.
Is there any logic in allowing Senators 12 years & House members only 6 years?
If Ted really wanted to redeem himself with the base he would file an amendment to repeal the 17th Amendment as Crat already said.
If Senators are going to be allowed 12 years in office then so should Representatives in the 8th Congressional district of WI rarely does any Representative last more than 3 terms or 6 years.