Citizen Legislators or Career Politicians ?

“The tyranny of political assemblies”

Alexis de Tocqueville

Calls for term limitation date back to a pre-Constitutional period when our Union operated under the Articles of Confederation.  Delegates serving in the Continental Congress between 1776 and 1788 were limited to a maximum of three years in any six year period. 

The framers, debating a new Constitution, envisioned Congress as an institution of citizen legislators who  temporarily interrupted business and personal careers to contribute their energies, wisdom, and skills to their nation.  After which, they would return their communities and resume their former lives.

The concept of career politicians was an anathema … and would have horrified most of them!

Tragically, their worst fears have been realized.  Congress has transformed itself into an elite ruling class of professional politicians who have;

• Exempted themselves from many onerous and costly regulations they imposed on the public they purport to serve,
• Concocted endless ways to waste gobs of public monies without delivering promised results
• Legislated away any accountability for their statements and/or actions, and
• Skillfully crafted a portfolio of publicly-funded perks and retirement benefits unattainable to all but a few top executives of the country’s largest, private corporations.

Since the Constitution’s adoption in 1789, 70-plus amendments have been offered to limit congressional terms.  While every president since Andrew Jackson supported presidential term reform, only a handful had the mettle to push for Congressional term limits. 

Eisenhower, a courageous exception, believed individuals serving in an environment of limited terms would “think of their congressional career as an important and exciting interlude in their life … dedicated to the entire public rather than as a way of making a living or making a career of exercising continuous political power.  A more rapid turnover of the membership in both Houses with its constant infusion of new blood would largely eliminate the ‘career’ politician in Congress … with little damage … except possibly to the personal ambitions of particular individuals.”

Since Congress has defeated all proposals to limit their own terms … voters have begun taken matters into their own hands.  Through a series of initiative petitions, fifteen states have now enacted congressional term limitations.

Regretfully, our state legislature, which can still be the first to pass a term limits bill, has thus far ignored the will of its people and killed past attempts to limitation congressional terms.  It has also denied our citizens the right of initiative petition with which they could enact such changes themselves.

Why is the New Hampshire Legislature so paranoid and afraid of its citizens?

• Despite its opponents dire warnings, our system of representative democracy will not disintegrate if term limits are imposed! 
• While a few decent and hard working members will have to step down if term reform becomes a reality, finding 535 capable individuals willing to serve will not be difficult, particularly if they don’t have to run against incumbents who’ve spent one or more terms raising campaign funds and running for reelection.
• Voter apathy, on the rise for decades, will decline as more candidates test the political waters.
• A Congress populated with members serving on a temporary, rather than a career basis, are likely to spend more time working for the good of the nation rather than trying to perpetuate their own careers.
• Washington newcomers can function effectively, perhaps even revitalizing and reorganizing the entrenched bureaucracy, forcing it to honestly meet the challenges and new realities of the 1990’s and twentieth-first century.

Our Constitution has served the nation well, and done so with only twenty-six Amendments over two centuries.  Yet, the nation wisely enacted the Twentieth Amendment limiting presidential terms. 

It is now time to place similar restrictions on Congress.  As that body is not prone to act, this effort must continue at the state level.  The New Hampshire Legislature must remember what Congress apparently forgot; ours is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.  There is no room in America for an elite which sets itself above the law!

If, however, our legislature again fails to act or, attentively, denies the public a chance to vote on this important issue next November, their constituents should “fire” them and concurrently seek ways to limit legislative power.

Despite their endless moaning and dire warnings that people would not stay in, or run for Congress without last fall’s proposed pay raise, not a single member resigned when the raise (which they tried to sneak through without a vote) was soundly defeated in response to tremendous public pressure . . .  other than those individuals forced out for improper/illegal personal conduct.  And, each of the special elections held after the pay raise defeat were hotly contested by both Republicans and Democrats.  Nevertheless, those persistent little devils finally managed to squeeze a whopping pay raise through by graciously agreeing to give up their outrageous fees they’ve been gouging the public for outside speaking.  Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln must roll in their graves when they hear about elected member of our government charging to talk to the public!  Then again, a cynic could easily make a case for such fees being little more than legalized pay-offs and potentially creating serious conflicts-of-interest.

Over the years, the House and Senate have quietly honed campaign-finance laws and a host of other incumbency-related perks a point where an average of 95% of those who members who chose to run for reelection win . . .  up from only 40% to 50% a century ago.

Meantime, the men and women of these august bodies have learned well the skills of how to make the folks back home feel warm and affectionate toward than array of carefully staged video clips and sound bites, an endless series of in-office photographs taken standing beside their constituents who are visiting Washington, phone calls to voters, periodic mailings, and other actions designed to convey an impression of special caring.  Regular increases in the funds available for such activities are always forthcoming.  Their return on this investment in time and taxpayer money arrives at the ballot box when they run for reelection . . . when the apparent personal attention and self-styled image of the candidate frequently overshadows the member’s attendance and voting records.

But, there is a possible solution . . . Congressional Term Reform.  It can return participation in Congress to a short-term opportunity for one to serve his/her country, not a career path.  It guarantees members of the House and Senate will return to the private sector where they will have to live within the regulations and pay the taxes they helped pass while serving in Washington.

• Elect one-fourth of the House every year,
• Elect one-sixth of the Senate each year, and
• Minimize/eliminate the overlap where Congressmen and Senators representing the same constituencies run in the same year.

Certainly, a few hard working and decent men serving in Congress will have to step down if Term Reform were to become a reality.  But, in a nation of more than 250,000,000 people, finding 535 qualified and willing to serve will not be a difficult problem. 

In spite of the alarmist cries from current and past members of Congress to the contrary, newcomers to Washington will be able to function, and perhaps even revitalize and reorganize the entrenched bureaucracy, forcing it to honestly address the needs of their constituents and the nation without being beholden to party leaders and/or special interest groups.