U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and other Republican senators have reintroduced an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would impose legal term limits on members of Congress. The amendment would impose legal term limits on members of Congress.
The proposed amendment would limit Senators to two six-year terms and Representatives to three two-year terms.
Cruz has been a strong advocate for congressional term limits and hopes this could be a solution that provides more oversight and accountability to those on Capitol Hill.
“Every year, Congress spends billions of dollars on giveaways for well-connected people: Washington insiders get taxpayer money, members of Congress get re-elected, and the system fails the American people.” Cruz said.
“It’s no wonder that the vast majority of Americans from across the political spectrum – Republicans, Democrats and independents – overwhelmingly support congressional term limits.” He said.
“The rise of political careerism in today’s Congress is a far cry from what the Founders expected of our federal governing institutions. I have long called for this approach to the breakdown in Washington, D.C., and I will continue to fight to hold career politicians accountable. As I have done in the past, I urge my colleagues to bring this constitutional amendment to the states for swift ratification.” Senator Cruz said.
Other Republican senators who have joined Cruz in promoting the proposed constitutional amendment include Mike Braun, Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Todd Young and Rick Scott.
This is the third Time Cruz has proposed a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on lawmakers, and in 2017, Cruz and Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) introduced a similar amendment. In 2019, Cruz and then-Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.) reintroduced the issue.
In the United States, presidents have term limits, but members of Congress do not. Critics charge that many stay in Congress for decades, forming all sorts of nepotistic relationships and being part of the Washington swamp and players in deep government.
In 2016, Cruz and DeSantis opined in a Washington Post editorial that term limits were necessary to “drain the (Washington) swamp.” The two lawmakers argue that while the Founding Fathers did not include term limits in the Constitution, they warned of the formation of a “permanent political class.
Cruz and others argue that the implementation of term limits could mean more change in Washington.
Casey Burgat, a senior governance fellow at the R Street Institute, a U.S. think tank, raised the downside of term limits for lawmakers at a Senate committee hearing in 2019. Burgat said mandating experienced members of Congress to leave Congress would “reduce the ability of Congress to do its job in our system of government.”
“Term limits have also been shown to reduce members’ efforts to develop and advance policy,” Bulgart said, “and discourage the building of bipartisan coalitions and relationships within the chamber that are often predicted by term-limit proponents.”
But he also said the study shows that when legislators no longer have to worry about elections, they “actually care less, not more, about the needs of their constituents and individual districts.”
Meanwhile, Nick Tomboulides, executive director of Term Limits USA, argued that the incumbent’s “incumbency advantage” creates barriers to entry for ordinary Americans who don’t have the connections to finance their campaigns. The “incumbent advantage” of incumbency creates a barrier to entry for ordinary Americans without the connections to fund a campaign.
“Elections may be able to unseat incumbents in theory, but that’s not how it works in the real world. Congressional incumbents have a 98 percent re-election rate.” Tomblides said at the same Senate committee hearing.
“So term limits are a check on arrogance, a check on incumbents, and a check on power. It’s a way to restore political courage while bringing fresh faces and ideas to Washington.” He argued.
Recent Comments