Proposed Constitutional Amendment Limits Congress to 12 Years, But Exempts Everyone Currently Serving

This proposed constitutional amendment aims to put the brakes on career politicians by limiting how long members of Congress can serve. If ratified, Representatives would be capped at three full terms (12 years total), and Senators at two full terms (also 12 years total). This is a massive structural change, but it only becomes law if three-fourths of the state legislatures sign off on it within seven years.

The 12-Year Clock Starts Now (For Everyone Else)

This resolution is straightforward about the limits. If you’re running for the House, you get three full bites at the apple. Once you serve a third term, you’re done. For the Senate, it’s two full terms. The bill specifies how they count partial terms, which is where things get technical: if a Representative is appointed to fill a vacancy and serves more than one year, that counts as a full term toward their limit. For a Senator filling a vacancy, they have to serve more than three years for it to count. This is a clear threshold, but you can bet future governors will be doing some serious math before appointing someone to a seat with, say, 35 months left on the clock.

The Grandfather Clause: Who Gets a Pass?

Here’s the part that hits the brakes on immediate change: the 'Who This Doesn't Affect' section. The limits do not apply to anyone already serving in Congress on the day this amendment is ratified. Think of it as a massive grandfather clause. If this amendment passes, every single current member of the House and Senate is exempt from the new 12-year limits. They can keep running and serving as long as they want, provided their constituents keep electing them. The term limits only kick in for the next generation of politicians.

Real-World Impact: Experience vs. Turnover

For the average person, this bill is a classic trade-off. On one hand, term limits force turnover, which means more fresh faces and new ideas cycling through Washington. If you’re tired of the same people running Congress for decades, this is a win. It could make representatives more responsive, knowing they have a limited window to get things done.

On the other hand, exempting all current members means the people who wrote this bill are protected from its consequences. This potentially delays the impact of term limits for years, depending on election cycles. Furthermore, limiting service to 12 years means Congress loses institutional knowledge. When a Senator who has spent 20 years mastering complex policy—say, trade agreements or military budgeting—is forced out, that expertise walks right out the door, leaving the field to less experienced members and potentially increasing the power of unelected staff and lobbyists. It’s a clear choice between prioritizing constant turnover or rewarding deep expertise.