Though not considered a Founding Document, the Articles of Confederation, ratified in 1781, served as a bridge between the government of the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention of 1787. They contained the notion of “rotation in office” in the form of representative limits of three terms in any six year period. The concept had many advocates including Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin but ultimately it was not incorporated into the Constitution. In a 2016 Daily Signal article author Jarrett Stepman makes reference to a pseudonymous 1788 essay: “The essay’s author worried that without a mechanism to push national legislators out of office from time to time, lawmakers would become “inattentive to the public good, callous, selfish, and the fountain of corruption.” How prescient.
It is widely understood that our Founders envisioned Citizen legislators chosen from their peers to serve their constituents honorably, advance their best interests and those of the county at large, then return home to live as ordinary citizens, making way for the next generation of leaders with new ideas and a fresh perspective.
Term Limits
Much has been written on the topic over the course of decades. If we agree that our political system and methodology of governing is broken – hardly debatable topics – then term limits may be the best first step, as it would address succession in the political portion of the ruling class. The eleven longest serving Senators have been in office since 1997, with recently retired Patrick Leahy of Vermont having assumed office in 1975. If the limit were set to two six-year terms, 31 of 100 current Senate seats would have turned over as of January 2021.
There are many good reasons for term limits – reducing the power of lobbyists, overcoming the insurmountable advantage of incumbency, and tapping into fresh ideas and life experiences. The organization U.S. Term Limits clearly outlines the reasons for and path forward to implementation in addition to providing the ability to sign a petition.
Voters might be surprised to know that once sworn in the priority for Representatives and Senators is not to legislate or serve constituents, but to fund raise with sights firmly set on the next election. Since the law prevents fundraising from their office, both parties have “call centers” just blocks from Capitol Hill. Here we see the advantage of incumbency – members are paid by taxpayers while they raise money for their reelection. Fundraising events are also held at local restaurants and nearby townhouses owned by lobbying firms or trade associations. Once elected, politicians tend to transition from constituent representation to a self-serving accumulation of power and wealth. Former Representative Tulsi Gabbard explained that leadership discourages any cooperation with the other party, to the point of threats related to re-election funding and support.
In January 2023 Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Ralph Norman introduced an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to impose term limits on members of Congress. The amendment would limit Senators to two six-year terms and House Representatives to three two-year terms once enacted. Senator Cruz described the current state of affairs as “…a government run by a small group of special interests and lifelong, permanently entrenched politicians who prey upon the brokenness of Washington to govern in a manner that is totally unaccountable to the American people.”
U.S. Senators Violate the Constitution
Senator Cynthia Lummis, commenting on the Cruz/Norman amendment said “Too often, Senators and Members of Congress become out of touch with the rest of the country when they find themselves in Washington for too long.” Senator Richard Burr provided an example in 2021 when he was one of seven Republicans that voted to convict President Trump on a single impeachment article. After the vote he stated “When this process started, I believed that it was unconstitutional to impeach a President who is no longer in office. I still believe that to be the case.” He tried to justify viability of the trial by claiming Senate ability to set precedent, but Article V clearly outlines the process for changing the Constitution, and it is not a majority vote of Senators but rather two-thirds of both houses of Congress AND state legislatures.
It clearly was unconstitutional – Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 stipulates that the Chief Justice shall preside. Justice Roberts refused – Article II, Section 4 states “How officers may be removed” and “…shall be removed from Office on Impeachment…” Use of these two auxiliary verbs is only applicable in present and future tense; President Trump was no longer in office, therefore it was not possible for him to be removed. By his own admission Burr (and 56 other Senators) voted for an unconstitutional act, violating their oath to uphold the Constitution and reflecting irreverence for it.
Last edited: February 2, 2023