Donald Trump is right about the need for term limits

To clean up Washington, send the swamp creatures packing

When they run for re-election, more than 90% of House members win.

When we said that an authority conferred by the free suffrages of the people never harmed a republic, we presupposed that the people, in giving that power, would limit, as well the time during which it was to be exercised. – Niccoló Machiavelli, “The Discourses,”. 1517.

Ronald Reagan famously said that “the nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.” In the same vein, he might have said that the nearest thing to lifetime employment we will ever see on this earth is a seat in the U.S. Congress.

Since 1964, the incumbency rate has averaged 93% in the House of Representatives and 82% in the Senate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Low approval ratings are clearly no obstacle to re-election.

Anyone watching the bi-party obstructionism and hypocrisy in Washington these days would surely conclude that it’s time to clean house. To the extent that the 2016 presidential election reflected a populist rejection of the status quo, what institution better encapsulates “more of the same” than Congress?

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

Donald Trump came out in favor of term limits during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

“If I’m elected president, I will push for a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress,” Trump said at a campaign rally in Colorado in October. He subsequently quantified those limits: six years in the House and 12 years in the Senate. If such a law were applied to the current Congress, almost half the sitting members would be out of a job.

House Speaker Paul Ryan has pledged to bring term limits to the floor for a vote. Even if he does, no one expects lawmakers to vote themselves out of a secure job that comes with generous benefits, including health care and a pension (five years of service required to qualify), and minimal demands on one’s time. The House has logged an average of 139 days in session a year since 2001.

(To be fair, representatives have duties to fulfill in their home districts as well.)

The public is on board with the idea of term limits. An October 2016 Rasmussen survey found that 74% of likely voters favored establishing term limits for members of Congress. The other 26% were equally divided between opposed and undecided.

That’s a pretty solid starting point, but history urges caution.

Term limits were included in the Republicans’ 1994 “Contract with America,” but the measure failed to garner the required votes.

Getty Images
Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia served more than 51 years in the U.S. Senate, longer than anyone in history.

 

Besides, voters may say they want to throw the bums out, but the evidence on re-election rates suggests they give their particular bum a pass!

What is to be done? Term limits have had great success on the state and local level. Fifteen states have term-limited legislatures. Thirty-six state governors have some form of term limits. Nine of the U.S.’s 10 largest cities have enacted term limits for mayor. And half of large-city governments limit the number of terms an individual may serve.

The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1951, limited the president and vice president to two terms in office. The only elected officials immune to term limits, it seems, are members of Congress. Self-interest argues that the thrust to impose them will have to come from the states.

Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides the guidelines for amending the original document in either of two ways. Congress may propose amendments, with the approval of two-thirds of both Houses, or the legislatures of two-thirds of the states may call a convention for that purpose. To date, the states have never exercised that option.

Phillip Blumel, president of U.S. Term Limits, a single-issue advocacy organization, reports some encouraging developments on that front. While a term-limits amendment is regularly introduced in each session, “this year it was almost a competition from members of Congress to introduce the bill,” Blumel says.

And for the first time in 2016, U.S. Term Limits turned its focus away from the national level to the states in a effort to get them to exercise their option to call for a convention.

“Our test case was Florida,” Blumel says. “The bill passed. The vote on the floor was overwhelmingly in favor.”

This year, U.S. Term Limits is targeting eight states to enact applications for a convention. That’s still a long way from the two-thirds, or 34 states, required.

“For us to be successful, the states do not have to have a convention,” Blumel explains. “Passing applications in the states will get Congress to act. Congress would write its own amendment.”

I am skeptical that these lifers will legislate themselves out of office. But Blumel cites a precedent: the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, which established the popular election of two senators from each state for a six-year term.

Prior to 1913, senators were elected by state legislatures. The House had passed several measures proposing an amendment on the direct election of senators, but “the bills could not get out of Senate committee,” Blumel says.

Then the states got into the act. Once 30 states had passed applications for a convention to amend the Constitution — close to the 32 needed at the time — Congress wrote and passed its own amendment.

“It took a decade back then,” Blumel says. Things happen a lot faster nowadays, which means “we’ll know in the next five years whether it’s going to happen or not.”

Many of the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, were in favor of term limits. They feared creating a permanent ruling class that would pursue its own interests at the expense of the public’s. Jefferson stressed “the necessity of rotation in office” as a means to prevent abuse.

But term limits, which were included in the Articles of Confederation, never made it into the Constitution based on the belief that regular elections were the best form of term limits.

In theory, elections should be the best form of term limits. But it hasn’t worked out that way. Many House seats are uncontested. The odds are so stacked against challengers that serious candidates are discouraged from running for office. Voters have a choice between an incumbent and a non-entity. Or the lesser of two evils.

And as for our public servants, the idea that they are self-sacrificing individuals interested in the common good is a fantasy. They are, like the rest of us, interested in advancing their own careers and financial security.

Because the public sector doesn’t offer open-ended monetary rewards, at least in terms of salary and bonus, power becomes its own reward, leading to unethical behavior, abuse and even corruption. Term limits would prevent special interests from completely overwhelming the public interest.

If the 2016 presidential election is any guide, the American public’s disgust with the political class has reached such an extreme that voters are willing to take a chance with devil they don’t know. Grass-roots organizations need to harness that “outsider” preference and build momentum for congressional term limits quickly before that enchantment with the devil starts to wane.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Boat Guy
Boat Guy
February 8, 2017 8:01 am

Term limits are in place for all elected representitives it is just not exercised at the ballot box by the electorate ! A disinterested population of people where 30% of eligable voters voting is considered an average turn out is one reason things are such a shambles a good second reason is the continuous observation of those elected to know just what these self interested band of parasites are up to is a full time job ! You cannot believe anything said or even printed as fact that comes out of Washington . What sounds like a good fair minded effort to do the correct thing ultimately does nothing of the sort and is often the exact opposite . The law of unintended consequences reins supreme , the trouble is those consequences were probably the intent all along!

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
  Boat Guy
February 8, 2017 9:45 am

“Term limits are in place…” Problem is that I may not want to limit MY representative; I want to limit YOUR representative. Given the seniority system, the people of West Virginia were entirely logical (and selfish) to send Robert Byrd to DC over and over to loot the place for as much pork as he could carry home. States that are more principled and refuse to reelect such corrupt money grabbers are rewarded with representatives with less seniority and, therefore, less power. We need term limits so that the states with more virtuous nation-oriented voters aren’t ripped off by the states with cynical, self-interested voters.

Aquapura
Aquapura
February 8, 2017 9:06 am

I’m in favor of term limits but I’d also like to eliminate all pension and health benefits after your tenure is over. Much rather see congress receive employment benefits tied to what is reality for the private sector. Would say the same of the president. It’s a civil servant job, you should be there for your constituents, not your personal wealth.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
February 8, 2017 9:49 am

Most of the lifers in congress have never had a real job. The only hard part is getting your party’s nomination the first time. After that, you have a job for life. Shit’s fucked up.

Suzanna
Suzanna
February 8, 2017 10:23 am

Career politicians become career criminals.
End of story.

Anonymous
Anonymous
February 8, 2017 10:53 am

Continuous reelection happens because those in office have established the solidest support among the party insiders that make them their nominee by virtue of having been in office during the previous term and establishing the relationships.

Voters mostly don’t really take a lot of participation in their party nomination process, they usually just go along with whomever they are given by their party leaders with a notable exception now and then.

So when ballot time comes, it is generally just the party that is voted for and it is running an incumbent as it’s candidate.

You can change that by participating in your party’s nomination process at the local level instead of leaving it to others.

Calling for the Federal government to establish term limits is calling for the Federal government to do what you should be doing for you.

Rob
Rob
February 8, 2017 11:21 am

So stop voting for them. You don’t need term limits. You need to get out there and fight against every single person who has ever served in the government. Convince the retarded morons who vote their party that they should never vote for for anyone who has been there before. I agree with the above comment. Every person who serves in government is corrupted. It doesn’t matter who they are or why they decided to serve, the cheddar will be waved in front of their noses and they will always take a bite. You would take a bite too so get over yourself. The only solution that I can see is for us all to embrace a simple mantra. Never vote for anyone who has served before. No two terms. No 10 terms. Once and done. And let’s face it; any greenhorn with good intentions is bound to do a better job than a corrupt lying asshole. And they are all corrupt lying assholes.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
  Rob
February 8, 2017 1:51 pm

How does my not voting for the corrupt person in my district stop someone else from purposely voting over & over for the corrupt candidate in their district whose stated purpose is to snatch as much booty for his district as possible? It’s less a problem of “corrupt lying assholes” than “corrupt honest assholes” like Maxine Waters whose platform is “I’ll get free shit for you” – or some GOP politician who promises free shit to his constituents, whether they be farmers, oldsters, retired military, people who work for General Dynamics, etc.

The seniority system rewards voters for voting for the most entrenched, most corrupt candidate. Terms limits would at least level the field amongst districts and states. Also term-limited candidates would presumably be less motivated by campaign contributions and more likely to at least do what’s right on their way out the door.

Have you not noticed that whole “you don’t need term limits, just stop voting for them” is the exact line used by the officeholders who never ever get voted out? Don’t fall for their bullshit.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Iska Waran
February 8, 2017 4:03 pm

If you don’t stand against something you stand for it by tolerating and accepting it instead of opposing it.

Get involved in your local party primaries and get someone different nominated, that’s how Trump (who is obviously different) got nominated to provide a choice.

Vodka
Vodka
February 8, 2017 1:20 pm

A near 90% re-election rate, even when Congress has a 15% approval rating, says it all. Rigged for the incumbents.

james the deplorable wanderer
james the deplorable wanderer
February 8, 2017 3:24 pm

“I voted for you last election, Mr. Mayor – five times”. – W. C. Fields, comedian of the 1920’s

Until real elections use voter ID to verify and limit votes to real, honest-to-goodness tax paying citizens, elections can still be stolen. Lobby your legislature to end voter fraud.