Every two years the majority of the House of Representatives has to run for re-election. The idea is that because of the constantly changing court of public opinion, legislators need to be constantly checked to ensure that they are actually serving the wants and needs of the people. So do they?
In my last blog post I wrote about how Filibustering slows down legislature. This has caused 73% of bills which passed in the House to stop dead in the senate. I won't rehash my previous argument; I'd instead like to offer what I see as a possible solution, congressional term limits.
As Congress functions currently, the same legislators in the senate can serve as many six year terms as they want. Until, as Mr. Stewart puts it, they expire, of course. The same goes for the House's two year terms. This means senators like Sen. McConnell of Kentucky have been in the legislature since 1984.
While one could argue that term limits would limit voters choices, I think it's important to note that long running senators (like McConnell) have, I think, an unfair ability to halt any bills which enter discussion. Yes, his constituents continue to vote him in, but should the Kentucky caucus have had total control over the discussion of bills in the Senate for nearly half a decade?
I think that having term limits in Congress could decrease the control special interest groups have over senators and representatives. The executive branch is subject to complete change every 8 years to combat corruption and tyranny, so why isn't the branch meant to represent the people's wishes held to the same standards?
While you did shed light on a major problem in congress, instating term limits also has its fair share of problems that might even eclipse todays problems. Rather than having term limits on every member of congress, a better idea would be having term limits on how long a senator, or a member of house can be in the position of the speaker of the house. Having new senators be elected to the speaker of the house would get rid of McConnell type power structure, giving others a chance to become speaker of the house and have their voice heard. Having elections within congress to attain higher roles in the senate or house would be a good way to stop one person from monopolizing congress.
ReplyDeleteYou brought up many interesting points with this post. I agree that the current way congress term limits is set up is far from ideal, but they are other ways to solve the problem. I think part of the reason someone like McConnell can have such a dominant run is because a large majority of the American people do not pay attention to what is happening in congress on a daily basis. They then see a familiar face and figure he has the experience to get the job done. If American's were more informed, this power imbalance would not occur nearly as often.
ReplyDeleteI think that this brings up a lot of valid arguments here and also faults that we still have in the country such as Kentucky influencing McConnell and therefore Senate. I think that term limits are a good idea although I wonder whether that would be set by the state governments or the federal government. Also I feel like any bill that would be purposed would have to pass through Congress and I doubt senators are very willing to give up their seats and powers. Maybe state legislatures should be able to set terms instead although then I feel like there is a problem with state governments limiting federal governments as we have seen so many times in the past.
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting! You bring up some good points, One of the things I didn't really mention was that multiple term limit bills have been brought forward in the House and Senate, but usually don't get out of committee. Even Ted Cruz introduced a two term limit for the senate, but, of course, nothing came of it.
Delete