Term limits may be necessary

Word on the street is that once United States Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada, read my last column about Ronald Burris he immediately called an emergency meeting of the Democratic Caucus. Now, following my recommendation and counsel, Burris is now the junior Senator from Illinois.

Just nine days after holding a news conference in the rain because the Senate barred him from entering its chamber, Burris walked onto the Senate floor escorted by Reid’s chief deputy Dick Durbin, a fellow Democrat also from Illinois. That same day Sen. Joseph Biden and Sen. Hillary Clinton gave farewell speeches. Both are leaving the Senate for senior positions in the new Obama Administration.

Vice President-elect Biden was first elected to the Senate in 1972 – at the ripe old age of 29. Biden has spent 36 years in the Senate – an entire lifetime. Reid first came to Congress in 1982. As we draw to the end of George W. Bush’s presidency – let’s be thankful for constitutionally mandated executive term limits and ponder the question, do we need Congressional term limits, too.

As a part of the 1994 “Contract with America,” Republicans of the 104th Congress made term limits a top priority, yet failed twice to pass a constitutional amendment. Limits would prohibit an individual from serving in Congress beyond a certain number of terms. A number of states have term limited members of their state legislature. Some states have even attempted to limit the terms of their members of Congress. But in 1995 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state term limits are unconstitutional and that allowing states to impose these restrictions would “weaken Congress’s national character.”

Supporters of term limits say that Congress is made up of too many career politicians who have undercut the notion of a citizen legislator. Longtime serving officials are so focused on staying in office that they lose touch with their constituents and are more susceptible to corruption. Backers of the term limit effort say limits will encourage more people to run for Congress especially underrepresented groups like minorities and women.

Congressional term limits do have detractors. They cite experience, institutional memory and strong constituent ties as objections to limits. Citizens should have the opportunity to vote for whomever they believe will best serve them in Congress, even longtime incumbents. Senator Orrin Hatch (Republican-Utah) said it best that “the real term limit is at the ballot box, and that is where it should be.”

Members of Congress are afraid to make decisions that may jeopardize their chances at re-election. Perhaps term limits are the answer? But that will require a constitutional amendment. We could start however with simpler reforms: slashing Congressional salaries and benefits, cutting large and entrenched staffs both in D.C. and at home; and eliminating out of state political contributions.

Careerism and unencumbered incumbency has allowed national problems to go unresolved. The nation’s framers never envisioned individuals serving countless decades in Congress. Term limits may be an undemocratic response to this prevailing problem. But as each day passes, they become more and more appealing.

 

Let Andrew know your thoughts at letters@technicianonline.com.