As the Arkansas State Senate Majority Leader, I understand that there are many controversial concerns regarding the idea of a Constitutional Convention and the thought of setting term limits for a our members of Congress. I have thoroughly weighed the pros and cons of having such said Constitutional Convention and I believe that our nation can benefit from the meeting. As for the proposal to change the amendment in regards to Congress member term limits, it took much deliberation before I could fully take a stance concerning this topic. Of course, the change of term limits would greatly affect our nation, but the question is, “Would the benefits outweigh the risks?” When thinking of ways to oppose this topic, I found that numerous people believe
The amendment process as stated in the Constitution is the process that “An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose. The amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.”. There are many pros and cons of the amendment process and I will discuss a few of them in this essay. In my opinion, there are more cons than pros of the amendment process. A con of the amendment process is that there isn’t much room for change as time goes on Better said as the amendments are outdated.
Some argue that congressional term limits are unconstitutional as “elections serve as inherent term limits” (Tombu 2022), but this is simply untrue as those running for reelection tend to receive more donations to their campaigns which leads to higher reelection rates (Tombu 2022). In order to truly prevent career politicians from running Washington term limits are necessary to even the election field and allow for new faces in congress. Along with this, the general population supports the enaction of term limits and congress is supposed to represent the will of the people. According to “U.S. Term Limits” “An overwhelming 82% of Americans support a Term Limits Amendment for Congress crossing party lines at; 89% Republican, 83% Independent, and 76% Democrat” (Suggestions on the Benefits of Term Limits n.d.). If Congress truly represents the will of the people they would pass a Term Limits
In 1990, term limits were about eight years in the Senate and six years in the Assembly. However, in 2010, it went up to twelve years no matter where they are. There was a higher term expectancy, lower switching, and more institutional memory. Term limits allowed for more diversity by representatives and more new ideas to try out coalitions. The problem with short term limits is that there was a loss of “institutional memory” where there is a well-crafted policy and “splashy” policy, to look good in the process.
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v Thornton 514 U.S. 779 (1995) 5-4 Facts: In 1992 Arkansas voters approved an amendment to the state constitution, prohibiting anyone who had previously served two terms in the Senate or three terms in the House of Representatives to run again. Representative Ray Thornton filed suit asking a state court to declare to declare the amendment unconstitutional. They claimed the Constitution establishes the sole qualifications for federal officeholders and the states may not alter them. The lower court struck down the amendment as unconstitutional and in 1994 the state Supreme Court affirmed.
The article is written by Richard Fenno in 1978, summarizing the dilemma of congressmen in the contemporary time. The author was specifically discussing about members of the House, who always seek for reelection during his legislative career, as stated in the initial part of the paper. Fenno went on to propose the conflict in incumbent congressmen 's career: more attention for the Washington career leads to less attention for the congressmen 's home state. The Washington career required commitment to build up support within the House. However, focusing on Washington rendered the congressman homeless, or losing his home 's supportive forces.
However, reelection being the motivator of members of Congress isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The motivation to be reelected incentivizes members of Congress to enact legislation and constantly work to improve the lives of citizens. Regardless of motive, as long as legislation is being passed through the House and members of Congress like Representative Long are improving the conditions of their district, the purpose of government is being
Arkansas amended their state constitution in 1992 to impose term limits on their legislators. Amendment 73, Section 3 prohibited people who served in the House of Representatives for three or more terms and people who served in the Senate for two or more terms from appearing on the ballot for reelection. Ray Thornton, a six-term House representative, challenged the amendment against U.S. Term Limits, Inc., a national advocacy group. The Arkansas State Supreme Court held Section 3 of Amendment 73 violated Article I of the Constitution. U.S. Term Limits Inc. appealed to the Supreme Court.
Modern congress and its members seem largely concerned and focused on partisan advancements. Though there are many reasons as to why the enormous division in congress is as it is, there is one factor that draws the most attention. Filibuster an action that is used by most congressmen and women to delay the passage of laws, has increasingly over the course of time become a negative action rather than positive. The use of mostly long speeches as ways to prohibit and hinder bills or laws is now being used by many senators to advance personal and party goals thus, it is crucial that the ban of filibuster must be considered and replaced with the simple majority rule. First and foremost, some reasons as to why filibuster should be exempted from
During political elections, or the presidential election per say, the election process can be hectic. Political parties strenuously work to convince people to favor their candidates. They perform this in order to receive political control and to rise in the governmental system. Two infamous political parties that are always competing are the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. The lure of gerrymandering is enticing because they take control of a state legislature by advancement of redistricting.
Are you opposed to the idea of congress members having term limits ? If you are I can understand why but personally I am not. Term limits would be very effective to see change, to give the best-qualified members a chance and restore government accountability. Don’t you think it would be a good idea to have term limits so there would actually be a chance of change ? Of course it would be a good idea !
This has been a topic in mind for many years. Should members of Congress have term limits? There are pros and cons of Congress having or not having term limits that many people use to argue their opinion. There can be benefits to term limits. This can be a way for new people to come into office every couple of years to have more of a variety of new opinions.
Today, the filibuster is a common scene in the U.S. Senate. It has been in practice for over 150 years, defending the minority against the majority vote. Measures to limit filibusters are implemented in Congress currently, including Woodrow Wilson’s
In recent years, the U.S. Senate has been embroiled in a countless number of filibusters which have a long history in the U.S. Congress. To supporters of the filibuster, such political procedures play an important role in a democratic society. They believe that the filibuster embodies the spirits of democracy to protect the minority from oppression in the United States. Reformers or skeptics of the filibuster, on the other hand, believe that filibusters sometimes severely hinder the operations of the government. Although people have witnessed many filibusters in history, the number of filibusters in the past few years surprised and infuriated many in America.
Is Gerrymandering a Controversial Topic? Gerrymandering is a process where the ruling political party uses the map of their state to draw lines that create voting districts in favor of their party. The result of this is that it doesn’t reflect the voters political views. For about 200 years the government has used gerrymandering during political elections and it continues to be used today (King, Elizabeth) .
For instance, I believe that the federal selection system should not allow judges to have the seat for life. Once a judge reaches the retirement age of 65 they should have to step down. This is because after a certain point of serving as a judge, people start to lose interest or they tend not to care as much. When their age is also put into this situation they tend to not know what is going on. They lose the ability to focus and retain what is happening in a case.