It is 2021 and it seems that the problems with immortal congressional terms have become worse. Congresspeople are able to serve as many consecutive terms as possible and that is grinding the gears of government to a halt in “old boys clubs”, lobbyists writing our bills, and no real way to combat it. Why? Because of the Incubmency Advantage, our politiicans in office don’t really have to “try” to win, it seems.
91% of incumbents in the House were re-elected in 2018 and 97% in 2016. For the Senate it was 84% and 93%, respectively (link). Presidential Historian at American University, Allan Lichtman, said the power of incumbency gives the candidate, “Name recognition; national attention, fundraising and campaign bases; control over the instruments of government; successful campaign experience; a presumption of success; and voters’ inertia and risk-aversion” (link). Couple this with the amount of money and influence in politics and we are staring the inevitable in the face; it is nearly impossible to unseat a Congressperson if they want to run again. To me, that means something is broken.
Is it really the case that people loved 91% of their Representatives and 84% of their Senators in 2018?
For added emphasis, the overall rate of win for incumbents in both house and senate in 2020 was 93%! People vote for the candidates they think will do a good job for them in theory.. So, 93% of people like their representation in Washington? (link) This flies in the face of the fact that we are at an all time low for Congressional approval rating. This metric has been more in the 10s-30s than in the 80s-90s since 2005 (link). Something just doesn’t add up.
What I would propose
I would limit Senators to 2 consecutive terms and House members 6. This would ensure 12 years in either chamber allowing for service during 2 Presidents. You are able to run for the other chamber of Congress after hitting your limit in the original chamber. Also, the congressperson could run again for their position after sitting out 1 term of the position (6 years for Senate, 2 years for House)…
Optional addition: Must wait 4 years after serving as a lobbyist whichever (this or the term they are sitting out) is longer.
Congressional term limits as a plan is not new, it has been debated many times since our inception. Even the articles of confederacy included the equivalent of congressional term limits (link). Most recently this was debated in the 1990s as an amendment by Republicans (link).
There are arguments for and against and both make some good points, however, I feel by adding one wrinkle, they both come into agreement. The only change needed is to require a “break” designed to eliminate the incumbent advantage for the candidate and better insure the people’s will and not the candidates Federal power and advantages are making the decision.
I would also go one step further and include 4 years (between the 2 and 6 year terms of Congress people) after working as a lobbyist to be the cooling off period for any person running for office, whichever is longer. This isn’t required, but I feel it would go a long way to helping curb special interests and re-align the government to keep pace in 2021.
Common Objections to Congressional Term Limits & My Argument
Short-term thinking
The idea is that if they can only serve X number of terms, they will only focus on the short-term as they won’t get any glory for long-term wins if they aren’t in office.
This is one of the reasons I would allow them to re-enter the race after sitting out a “cool-off” period. If you are really confident and your policies are great, you will get elected just as easily as the challenger to the incumbent you’ll face in the next race you can run.
Loss of experience & “good” congresspeople
If a “good” congressperson terms out, they won’t be able to offer that experience.
This is also helped by the ability to run again, but I would also argue this is one of the major problems of today’s Congress. Experience means learning loopholes and parliamentary procedure ins and outs which has led to decades or centuries old rules being utilized to pass or block political endeavours. This perverts the system of Government into who can best navigate it rather than best serve their constituents. Making this experience revolve around not being an incumbent at given intervals can go a long way to giving a check of power to the people.
Term limits could actually raise re-election rates
This tries to compare Presidential statistics at its best. There have been 61.5% of Presidents that have been re-elected after term limits were enacted in 1951 but before that, re-election rates of Presidents was just 38.7% (link). This is arguing that this would be seen in the Congress if term limits are enacted.
I would argue that this is a law of large numbers issue. These are not a statistically comparable set of numbers. There have only been a few Presidents since 1951 or even our country for that matter which is only 46. However, the senate has 100 and the house has vastly more (435). A theoretical Federal Congress cooling off period would yield way more Senators than Presidents and vastly more House members than either. This would give us a truer sense of the percentage of re-election than any canvassing of past Presidential elections.
Term limits are hard to introduce and implement
This argument is alleging that term limits would be hard to introduce in that they are limiting the abilities of the people that must vote for the limits. Also, it requires the dreaded ⅔ to pass because it as a constitutional amendment.
I feel this one is the hardest to surmount. However, grandfathering current politicians could help them feel they aren’t stealing their own job. There are other options as well, but that feels the most palatable.
Being that Congress is far from perfect and the most glaring difference is between re-election rate and approval rating over recent history. It is becoming quite clear that Incumbency is a major issue helping fuel gridlock in Washington, if only from the personnel if not the actions of that body due to complacency. Enacting my proposed “cool off period”, Congress would get a much needed kick in the pants to move, but the ability to keep serving if your constituents truly want your leadership, as a challenger and incumbent.
