On Sunday, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colorado) said that Republican lawmakers would pursue changes to federal elections law to impose term limits on members of Congress, an action that would curtail the rights of U.S. voters.
“The 118th Congress WILL vote on Term Limits for lawmakers. After years and years of talk, we’ll finally see where people truly stand on this issue,” Boebert tweeted on Sunday afternoon. She did not say what she believes the term limit should be, however.
On Monday morning, Rep. James Comer (R-Kentucky) said during a Fox News interview that he also hoped for a vote on the issue, claiming it was one that his constituents were “most excited” to see.
“This is something that Republicans campaign on every election, but yet we haven’t had a term limits vote in the six years I’ve been in Congress,” Comer said.
Polling shows that most Americans support the idea of term limits; in a Reuters/Ipsos poll published in November, 79 percent of respondents agreed that members of Congress should be limited to a certain number of years in office. Still, the concept is inherently anti-democratic, as it limits voters’ ability to decide who they want to represent them.
According to a 2018 analysis from The Brookings Institution, term limits remove power from voters and prevent them from voting for lawmakers who have already earned their trust.
Term limits also make it more difficult for lawmakers to effectively work on behalf of constituents’ interests — having a new influx of elected leaders every few years means that inexperienced lawmakers have to learn the process of legislating upon taking office. “Crafting legislative proposals is a learned skill; as in other professions, experience matters,” Brookings noted, adding that “the public is not best served if inexperienced members are making policy choices with widespread, lasting effects.”
Though rooting out corruption is one of the primary justifications for promoting term limits, corruption often takes place when lawmakers are inexperienced. “Novice legislators will look to fill their own informational and policy gaps by an increased reliance on special interests and lobbyists,” Brookings pointed out.
In response to Boebert’s tweet, one Twitter user pointed out the issues that arose when term limits were introduced at the state level in Michigan.
“I had an opportunity to vote for term limits in Michigan and I supported it,” wrote Douglas Allen Arenberg, a professor of pulmonary diseases at the University of Michigan. “I regret it now. What you have now are inexperienced people with no reason to even try to work with one another. It has resulted in legislative paralysis best, and outright stupidity at worst.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.