Featured
Solution to Government Gridlock: Term Limits
Whether you’re looking in from the right, left or somewhere in between, I believe we all can agree on one thing: Politicians in Washington generally spend too much time and energy on getting reelected and not enough on governing and representing their constituents.
This outrage can be traced directly to February 27, 1951.
That’s the day the 22nd Amendment was ratified, limiting Presidential terms — and thus throwing off kilter the “balance of powers” dictated by the Founding Fathers in our Constitution. Why? Because the 22nd Amendment did nothing to limit term limits for members of the Senate, House of Representatives or Supreme Court.
Our nation’s founders never foresaw the “career politicians” who roam the halls of Congress today. Rather, they envisioned political office as a dedicated period of public service in the course of one’s life, not an end-all primary vocation. A bit Utopian, perhaps, but a desireable ideal for our American democracy.
And (I can’t believe I’m saying this) that’s why I’m cheering for South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint. Quietly last November, he introduced a “Term Limits for All” Constitutional Amendment that would limit every House member to three terms (6 years max), and every Senator to two terms (12 years max).
Says DeMint:
Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians. As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward spending taxpayer dollars to buyoff special interests, covering over corruption in the bureaucracy, fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork – in short, amassing their own power.
Is it possible to ratify such an Amendment? I doubt it. But the 22nd Amendment is proof that term limits can be achieved, though its ratification in 1951 was primarily a measure to prevent the Presidency from becoming a monarchy after FDR was elected to four consecutive terms.
Perhaps if a splinter group of Tea Partiers (under a different name, please) embraced term limits as their sole mission, it could truly be called a movement.
And more moderates like me might just join in support.
Discussion
One comment for “Solution to Government Gridlock: Term Limits”
Post a comment
Term limits for congressional members won’t do anything significant, though, as a particularly common path now will become even more common: going straight to K Street to become a lobbyist the second one’s term is over.
So somebody could serve 18 years in congress under DeMint’s plan and then spend the next 20 selling all the influence they’ve gained from those years. Yeah, they wouldn’t be literally voting anymore, but their proxies would do the same thing.
Eh, and seriously, fuck Jim DeMint; I wouldn’t care if that bastard turned around tomorrow and came out pro-choice and anti-card check, I could never support that worthless cunt.