A New Push for Term Limits

Reader Comments
Back to blog

There is a misperception here that the act of 'bonding' or, more properly, executing a promissory note to reinforce one's pledge of limited consecutive term in office requires money up front.
This is not true, since the promissory note does not become 'ripe' or demanding of payment until the pledged candidate files for election beyond the term that is stipulated in the promissory note. Then, and only then, are funds required to pay the charity specified in the note.
For example, if a candidate pledges no more than three (3) consecutive terms in the House of Representatives, and signs a note to that effect for $250,000, then on the day that candidate files to run for his fourth (4) consecutive term, the promissory note becomes due for payment in full.
So, the candidate does not need to be a rich man to execute his bonded pledge; only an honest one.
It is down the road, when he or she goes back on their word and reneges on his or her pledge that it is time to pay the piper, in which case the bonded pledge serves its purpose by penalizing the candidate financially, not to mention the negative publicity that would follow his campaign to oblivion.

Ken Benway, President, Alliance for Bonded Term Limits, Inc. of NC 6:37AM May 12, 2010

Bonded term limits are OK, but I worry more about the non-elected staff and senior administrators who often influence policy and votes more then our elected officials. Many more key administrative positions should be taken out of the protection of Civil Service tp allow for more appointments rather then the current approximate 1200 senior decision making positions.
Roger Davis
May 7, 2010
Pearland, Texas

Roger Davis of TX 1:17AM May 07, 2010

Although I've not been in favor of term limits, Bob Neff is on to what we're all on to: our senators and representatives not accomplishing enough while in office. Problems grow into catastrophes while those in office simply grow old without solving the problems. Just look at illegal immigration, now a problem affecting everything from health care to national security. Or the so-called "war" on drugs that has cost countless millions of dollars to wage and produced little in the way of results. Or the enormous expense involved in our spending on national defense, homeland security, nation-building, and foreign aid designed to gain the cooperation of other countries--all because of a foreign policy that succeeds only in keeping us in the cross-hairs of terrorists. Or the free availability of firearms to all, including those who pose a threat to our safety. Or the influence of money on our elected officials (lately writ large by the Supreme Court) and the legislation they pass or fail to, effectively taking away the one-vote, one person principle that has contributed so much to the greatness that was America.
Term limits, bonded or not, are a last resort of frustrated voters, not the smart weapon of informed ones. I agree we should hold our senators and representatives responsible for so many big problems left unsolved for far too long. We should do so, though, in the voting booth every election. There's no last resort in that. Our votes are an efficient weapon for weeding out the ineffective and the unreliable who slink into office despite our best efforts as gatekeepers.
An informed electorate converging on polling places every Election Day (and for primaries, too) would look pretty threatening to sleezier candidates for office. It's the best way to hold all politicians' feet to the fire, a great way to eliminate much of the influence of money on politics, and the only way to turn Washington, D.C., into problem-solving central.

Ron W. Smith of UT 4:20PM May 06, 2010

Sorry if I gave that impression. I am eagerly supporting Republican candidates who are making bonded term limits pledges. In fact, the purpose for my initial comment was to encourage the Freshmen 50 to do just that. The rest of the issues are just symptoms of a broken system.
Andy Woerner
Candidate for U.S. Senate Hawaii

Andy Woerner of HI 2:27PM May 06, 2010

It is interesting that Mr. Woerner only mentions "Republicans" that failed to keep their promise! I should think that this is not about partisanship but about America. All politicians that pursue office with themselves in mind and not their country should not be elected. His note seems to indicate his ideals! I am a DEMOCRAT, so you should vote for ME! Bunk! Elect responsible, responsive people to serve their COUNTRY, not themselves! We have lost our way and we need to get back on track. Get the lobbyists out of DC and re-establish what is already constitutionally there, responsible leadership by our elected officials! The American public have been lulled into sleep by the gerrymandering of our political process into one of helplessness. We ALL need to fight back and bring America back to its founding principles, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Richard Gillespie of MI 10:34AM May 06, 2010

BEN: Although you are correct in pointing out a reduction in legislative "experience", most voters would agree that under the current system, our legislators don't seem to be able to put their supposedly superior "experience" to good use.
In comparison, one can look at most of the founding fathers who made much better and more important decisions in only a few short years. After that, they either moved up, or moved back home.
If you'd prefer to argue the value of legislative complexity, just look at our tax code or the recent health care bill. For me, I'd prefer a simpler route.
Andy Woerner
Candidate for U.S. Senate Hawaii
htt://www.andyforussenatehawaii.com

Andy Woerner of HI 9:27AM May 06, 2010

Having lived in states with term limits, one major problem is that they decrease the legislators' expertise in dealing with complex issues, strengthening the relative power of paid staffers and lobbyists. Ignorance and inexperience are not assets to be encouraged.
If you truly think that your Senator or Representative is corrupt or out of touch, the answer is to get up off your couch and campaign against them, not to rally for some one-size-fits-all "solution" that creates more problems than it solves.
Simplistic solutions to complex problems almost always turn out to be wrong.

Ben of MO 3:05PM May 05, 2010

The Political Policy Maker May 2, 2010
To fix it we must break it...cut and paste and send this to every law maker in Congress.
___the CONGRESS
__ST SESSION S.J. RES. ______
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative
to limiting the number of terms of the U S House of Representatives and
U S Senate Members of Congress may serve to 2 terms in either Congress
and to amend the terms of both Congressional house members to 6
Years per election cycle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
The deciding interests of the people of the United States and members
of the Congress affixed to this document introduced the following joint
Resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on
_________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative
to limiting the number of terms that the members of Congress may serve
in the House of Representatives to two (2) terms and the Senate to two (2)
terms.
Applicable to both houses the term shall not exceed six (6) years and alternate
election cycles as deemed by the congressional election committee with one third
of the house representatives position being placed for open election and
alternating every two (2) years so as to not disturb the United States ability to legislate
and address areas of national security, with respect to the Senate one third of the U S
Senators positions will be placed for open election and alternating every two years.
For the purpose of this resolution only, only one senate member from a state shall be
in an election cycle so as to assure that no state be deprived or taken advantage of during
any election cycle during the legislator replacement and national and state security to not
be impaired. In the event that two senators from the same state are required by the amendment to vacate the position upon the next election cycle the senator with the least amount of terms shall
prevail and be eligible for incumbency in the next election cycle remain if he wins his position
in the regular elective process.
This resolution shall be resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled with the majority votes of each House
concurring therein and ratified by both Houses, that the following article is proposed
as an amendment to the constitution when ratified by half of the 50 states.
“Article-----
“ Section 1. No person who has serve more than two terms as a Representative of that persons
district in the House of Representative as outlined in the Constitution of the United States
shall be eligible for election to the House of Representative upon passage of the amendment. For the purpose of this section the election of a person or appointment to a vacancy shall constitute one term in the House of Representatives if the person taking office concludes two years of service
Prior to the beginning of the next term. For the purpose of this section only the two years
Prior shall be outlined as two years before the swearing in date and not election date.
“SECTION 2. No person who has served more than two terms in the United States Senate
of that persons state of representation in the United States Senate as outlined in the Constitution of the United States shall be eligible for election to the United States Senate upon passage of the amendment. For the purpose of this section the election of a person or appointment to a vacancy shall constitute one term in the United States Senate, if the person taking office concludes two years of service prior to the beginning of the next term.
“SECTION 3. No person shall move or by benefit of redistrict or other means of redistricting themselves be eligible for election to the House of Representatives in other districts for and until 10 years after the end of the last term served in the House of Representatives.”
“SECTION 4. The Representative member that has served one or two terms in the House of Representatives and is ineligible for reelection in the House of Representatives may commence election process for a senatorial position only after leaving the position held in the House of Representatives and may make no announce of such or begin campaigning during that persons term until vacating the position held. The Senatorial member that has served one or two terms and is ineligible for re-election in the United States Senate may commence election process for a Representative position only after leaving the position held in the United States Senate and may make no announce or begin campaigning during that persons term until vacating the position held.”
“SECTION 5. Any and all terms beginning before ratification shall be considered as one term served unless that term is less than two years as described in SECTION 1 by any person in the house or the senate for the purpose of this amendment and shall then defer to the laws set by section 2,3,4,5. These rules shall commence one day following the final signing into law.”
In the proposal of this amendment all interested American citizens may come forth and be heard
On this issue at a time designated by the committee and before committee debate. Furthermore all committee members must make the amendment to the Constitution available to all members of the House of Representatives and the United States Senate so they may make constituents aware of this resolution for public comment during the debate process and for transparency.
All sponsors to the Amendment should affix signature and official seal to the Amendment by
procedural means.

Rick Grimes of TX 1:16PM May 05, 2010

to impose term limits on members of Congress unless you also impose term limits on federal judges and members of the Supreme Court. You will need a constitutional amendment---something very hard to get.
As for this "bonding" stuff-----utter nonsense. Your ideal best lawmakers do not have substantial assets to "set aside" to be sent to charity if they run too long. You want elections dominated by the richest people who could place the most in some contingent charitable trust?
This is another Republican trick to fill Congress with Republican hacks.

Muser of NM 11:58AM May 05, 2010

Voters should always be wary of politicians, but they should be particularly wary of politicians promising term limits as an election approaches.
In 1994 73 Republican candidates pledged to limit their terms in Congress. 68 went on to break their word to the American people.
In 2010, a huge number of candidates are once again talking term limits. They should expect to be compared to fraud of 1994 unless they back their word with a bonded pledge.
Andy Woerner
Democratic Candidate for U.S. Senate-Hawaii
http://www.andyforussenatehawaii.com

Andy Woerner of HI 7:02AM May 05, 2010