This bill proposes a constitutional amendment to limit members of the House of Representatives to three terms and Senators to two terms, excluding current members upon ratification.
Tim Burchett
Representative
TN-2
This bill proposes a constitutional amendment to limit the terms of members of Congress. Representatives would be limited to three terms, while Senators would be limited to two terms. The amendment would not apply to members of Congress serving when the amendment is ratified and must be ratified within seven years.
Proposed Constitutional Amendment Sets Term Limits: 3 Terms for House, 2 for Senate, Current Members Exempt
Heads up, there's a proposal on the table to change the U.S. Constitution by setting term limits for members of Congress. If ratified by three-fourths of the states within seven years, this amendment would cap how long folks can serve on Capitol Hill.
Setting the Clock on Congress
Here’s the breakdown: Representatives in the House would be limited to serving three terms, which adds up to six years. Senators would get two terms, totaling twelve years. The proposal also clarifies how filling a vacant seat mid-term counts. If someone steps into a House seat for more than a year, it counts as one of their three terms. For the Senate, filling a vacancy for more than three years counts as one of their two terms. These rules aim to create clear boundaries on service duration.
The Fine Print: Who Gets a Pass?
Now, here’s a crucial detail tucked into Section 3: these term limits would not apply to anyone already serving in Congress at the moment the amendment gets ratified by the states. Essentially, current members could continue serving beyond the new limits, while anyone elected afterward would have to abide by the three-term or two-term caps. This creates a situation where, at least for a while, there would be two different sets of rules for lawmakers based on when they were first elected relative to ratification.
Shaking Things Up vs. Losing Know-How
The idea behind term limits often involves bringing fresh perspectives to Washington and potentially reducing the influence that can come with decades in office. Proponents might argue this encourages lawmakers to focus on getting things done rather than constantly campaigning. However, there's another side to consider. Limiting terms means losing experienced legislators who have deep knowledge of complex issues and how Congress operates. This could potentially shift more influence to long-term staffers or lobbyists who stick around longer than the elected officials. It's a trade-off between new energy and institutional memory.