Term limits in Congress could end special interests’ reign
On Feb. 27, Americans across the nation celebrated National Term Limits Day.
That day celebrates ratification of the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, setting a limit of two four-year terms for American presidents. The history of this important amendment is informative for today’s conversation around expanding the concept to include members of Congress.
Until Franklin Roosevelt, no president had served more than two elected terms in office.
It was a tradition established by George Washington. Two presidents prior to FDR had sought to do so – Ulysses S. Grant and Woodrow Wilson – and had failed in even securing their party’s nominations. Roosevelt, citing his importance in World War II, ran for an unprecedented third term and then a fourth, even though he was ill (he died 82 days into his fourth term).
After his presidency, there were widespread calls to establish a constitutional amendment to set term limits for the president.
Roosevelt’s successor, Harry Truman, who was an advocate of term limits for both the presidency and Congress, supported this initiative.
When Congress appeared reluctant to pass an amendment setting terms for the presidency, the states started to act by calling for a constitutional amendment.
As the states were nearing the two-thirds majority needed to force Congress to act, Congress decided it was in its best interest to address the issue. This was the genesis of the 22nd Amendment.
Harry Truman, who was president when the 22nd Amendment was ratified, believed two terms were enough for any occupant in the White House. Because he had served all but 82 days of two full terms, he opted not to run again in 1952.
Truman hoped that Congress would further act on term limits for itself after the 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951, but sadly, Congress has so far failed to do so.
A recent Pew Research poll showed 87% of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, support congressional term limits. Yet despite this overwhelming support, Congress refuses to act on congressional term limits.
Since then, the case for terms limits has become the most popular, bipartisan issue in our country.
A recent Pew Research poll showed 87% of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, support congressional term limits. Yet despite this overwhelming support, Congress refuses to act on congressional term limits.
Recently, Congressman Ralph Norman’s resolution that would have set terms for the House of Representatives at three terms and the Senate at two terms was defeated by a committee vote of 19-17, despite having more than 100 co-sponsors.
So, if Congress won’t pass term limits, what can be done? Just as with presidential terms, states can take the initiative – calling for a convention to adopt a congressional term limits amendment. When enough states request a convention to add a congressional term limits amendment to the Constitution, the amendment can be proposed by the states for ratification.
Seven states - Florida, Alabama, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and West Virginia – have called for a limited convention to propose a congressional term limits amendment to the Constitution.
The Palmetto State could soon join this roster. Legislation currently exists in South Carolina to add our state to the list of states calling for term limits for Congress.
Term limits would return accountability to the people and take away the power of the special interests in Washington. It’s time: We need term limits for Congress.
John Warren is the South Carolina State director for U.S. Term Limits. In 2018, he was a GOP candidate for governor in S.C.