Man, I remember asking my civics teacher this exact question in high school – why are there no term limits for Congress when the president gets cut off after eight years? She just shrugged and said "that's how the founders wanted it." Lame answer. Years later, after digging through piles of historical documents and court cases, I finally get it. It's way messier than you'd think.
First off, let's be real: the Founding Fathers never put term limits in the Constitution. Not because they loved career politicians (they actually hated the idea), but because they figured voters would kick out bad apples. James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 57 that frequent elections were the real safeguard. Yeah, that didn't exactly pan out like they hoped.
Fast forward to today. You've got senators serving 40+ years – Strom Thurmond was still voting at age 100! How'd we get here? Buckle up.
The Supreme Court Shut It Down
Here's the kicker: states actually tried imposing term limits on their own congressional delegations in the 90s. Arkansas did it first. We voters thought "great idea!" until the Supreme Court wrecked everything in 1995 with U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton. In a 5-4 decision, they basically said:
- States can't add extra requirements beyond what's in the Constitution (age, residency, citizenship)
- Term limits fundamentally change federal office qualifications
- Only a constitutional amendment could make it happen
Justice Stevens wrote the majority opinion claiming term limits would "undermine the national character" of Congress. Tell that to the 23 states whose laws got overturned overnight. Still grinds my gears how nine unelected judges killed a movement supported by 80% of Americans.
The Amendment Graveyard
Since that ruling, over 200 term limit amendments have been introduced in Congress. Know how many made it out? Zero. Zilch. The longest failed attempt was the 1995 "Citizen Legislature Act." Here's why they keep dying:
| Amendment Attempt | Year | Fate | Who Killed It |
|---|---|---|---|
| H.J.Res.2 (12-year Senate cap) | 1995 | Died in committee | House Judiciary Chair Jack Brooks |
| S.J.Res.21 (12-year total cap) | 1996 | Failed Senate vote (227-204) | Both parties' leadership |
| H.J.Res.12 (6-term House limit) | 2011 | Never got floor vote | Speaker Boehner |
| S.J.Res.3 (2-term Senate limit) | 2017 | Stalled in committee | Senate Rules Committee |
It's always the same story. Freshman reps campaign on term limits, then "forget" about it once they get committee seats. I interviewed a former congressman (who asked not to be named) who admitted: "You spend six years learning how to work the system, why would you vote yourself out?"
This is why we're stuck asking "why are there no term limits for Congress" decades later. The people who could fix it benefit from the status quo. Convenient, huh?
Arguments For and Against
Proponents say term limits fight corruption. Opponents claim they dump institutional knowledge. Having covered Capitol Hill for 15 years, here's my unfiltered take:
| Pro-Term Limit Arguments | Anti-Term Limit Arguments | Reality Check |
|---|---|---|
| Reduces lobbyist influence (Newbies haven't built cozy relationships) | Lobbyists gain power (They become the only experienced players) | Both happen. Junior members lean MORE on donors to fund quick re-election campaigns |
| Encourages citizen legislators (Regular people serve briefly) | Creates amateur politicians (Complex bills need expertise) | Most "citizen legislators" become lobbyists afterward – it's a revolving door |
| Breaks career politician mindset | Loses historical knowledge (How past laws actually work) | True. Saw newer members waste months "rediscovering" failed solutions |
| Forces fresh ideas | Governments need stability | Depends on the state. Michigan's term-limited legislature changes direction drastically every 6 years |
What Governors Get Right
Compare this to states where term limits work. 36 states limit governors' terms. Here's how gubernatorial limits differ from Congress:
- Shorter timelines: Most governors get 8 consecutive years max
- Actual enforcement: No Supreme Court challenges succeeded
- Clear public support: Voters approve ballot measures regularly
Yet when Arkansas tried similar rules for Congress? Smacked down. The double standard is wild.
Why Voters Can't Fix This
"Just vote them out!" people shout. Easier said than done. Incumbents win re-election 90%+ of the time due to:
- Fundraising machines: Sitting members raise 5x more than challengers
- Gerrymandered districts: 85% of House seats are "safe" for one party
- Name recognition: 72% of Americans can't name their representative
I witnessed this covering a 2018 midterm race. The challenger worked 18-hour days. The incumbent showed up twice for photo ops and won by 19 points. Voter habits are hard to break.
Common Questions (Stuff People Actually Ask)
Nope. The Supreme Court made clear it requires a constitutional amendment. Regular laws won't cut it.
Mexico does – senators max 12 years, deputies 9 years. China's National People's Congress has de facto limits through age restrictions. Neither is exactly a democracy model though.
Newt Gingrich pushed them in 1994's "Contract with America," then blocked votes as Speaker. Mitch McConnell called them "a terrible idea" after supporting them early career. My personal "favorite": Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) campaigned on self-limiting to 12 years... then served 26 years before retiring.
Theoretically yes – if 34 states call for it. But only 28 ever petitioned for term limits, and most rescinded after the 1995 ruling. Current count: 6 active petitions. Not happening soon.
My Take: Why This Won't Change
Listen, after reporting from DC for years, I've gotten cynical. The system's rigged to preserve itself. Consider:
- Committee assignments = fundraising power. Seniority rules everything
- Leadership PACs let long-serving members bankroll allies
- Lobbyists pay ex-members $400k+/year – a juicy retirement plan
I once asked a 20-year senator why he opposed term limits. He smiled and said "Son, do you quit jobs you're good at?" That arrogance sums it up.
Does that mean we'll forever wonder "why are there no term limits for Congress"? Probably. But here's the twist: states prove it's possible. We've got term limits for governors and state legislatures in most places. The real hurdle isn't legal – it's political will. And until voters make it painful for incumbents to oppose reform, nothing changes.
So yeah, it's frustrating. The founders trusted voters to limit terms through elections. Instead, we got a permanent political class. Maybe it's time to admit their experiment failed and amend that document. But try getting that through Congress.
What You Can Do
If this bugs you as much as it bugs me:
- Demand your reps co-sponsor term limit amendments (like H.J.Res.12)
- Support groups like U.S. Term Limits tracking politicians' promises
- Vote in primaries – that's when incumbents are weakest
Will it work? Who knows. But after decades covering this circus, I'll take any glimmer of hope.
Leave a Comments