Term Limits and the Founding Fathers

D

Dust Monkey

New member
I am doing research in the area of Term Limits. Do any of you Federalists Papers guru's have any quotes from the Founders about Term Limits?

To make this Gun related; It would be nice that term limits kept gun grabbers like Kennedy and Schumer from running again.
 
To make this Gun related; It would be nice that term limits kept gun grabbers like Kennedy and Schumer from running again.
Click to expand...

Doesn't really have to be gun related here. Also, consider that it would also prevent pro-gun lawmakers from running again. People like Kennedy and Schumer can afford to be anti-gun because their constituents (at least a majority of them) are anti-gun. It's not likely either one would be replaced with somebody gun-friendly if forced to retire.

As for quotes, the first thing I found was this. Quotes against term limits. I imagine there may be others in favor, but I've never heard any. I'm sure others here will know more.
 
You are going to be hard pressed to find much support for term limits in the writings of our founding fathers as they had a rather negative opinion of that idea.

Regards,
Richard
 
Actually, I don't think there was much discussion although I reserve the right to be wrong. The system the dead European White Guys left us has term limits inherent to its construction. Every two years the entire house and 1/3 of the senate is up for election. If we wanted to we could bring the three ring circus known as fed.gov to a screeching halt with just one election. The politicos get around the delivered system with election laws, gerrymandering, financing rules and media control. Maybe a study of the election system in view of the consitutional founding would be appropriate.

Edited thought: I need to add one additional factor effecting our ability to change congress-----really sweet pension programs congress voted itself.
 
Last edited:
If we wanted to we could bring the three ring circus known as fed.gov to a screeching halt with just one election. The politicos get around the delivered system with election laws, gerrymandering, financing rules and media control. Maybe a study of the election system in view of the consitutional founding would be appropriate.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think actual election reforms would be much more effective than term limits. The factors you mention (particularly gerrymandering and financing), obviously, are big ones.
 
Thats what I am hoping Richard. Actually I would like some quotes from the founders AGAINST Term Limits.
Click to expand...
The founders were not right about everything.

For a modern perspective in support of term limits, you might start with Polsby's famous paper, "The Institutionalization of Congress." If you have access to jstor:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0554(196803)62:1<144:TIOTUH>2.0.CO;2-N

If not, I've got an html copy I can send you, but it doesn't have the graphs (I think the original had graphs... I don't really remember though)... just the data tables.
 
I would love to see term limits, the Founding Fathers believed in service to thier fellow man, I just don't see that being all that common in D.C. nowadays.

On a more fun note, I think we should just outlaw all air-conditioning in Public buildings in D.C. That would certianly eliminate a lot of people working long hours in D.C. during the summer months. Less hours in D.C. less intrustion in my life, at least less effiecent intrustion in my life. :p

(Okay maybe keep the air conditioning on in the Smithsonian, I love the place)
 
I believe the general sentiment...

of the Founding Fathers was that specific term limits were not necessary. I don't have any quotes to give you, sorry.

The Founders (as I was always led to believe) felt that Govt service was an imposition on the lives of citizens (although a necessary one), and that after service, representatives would leave Govt and return to their normal lives.

And that the fact that we had regular and frequent elections provided all the limitation needed.

Consider this, Washington was actually offered Kingship, and refused it. With this sterling example in front of them, the mood of the times came to favor idividual representatives who voluntarily limited their service to one or two terms.

Consider, also, that one of the big sticks we have to hold politicians accountable is their hope of re-election. A quick look at the actions of some "lame-duck" politicians, since they know they will not be re-elected, and you find some of the worst actions possible.
 
Many years ago, we were a nation that believed in honor and tradition. As traditions fade or are seen as being outdated, we tend to create laws to govern our actions.

I believe that George Washington (and I am sure others) personally felt a need for term limits and so he self-limited his presidency. His decision set in place a tradition that kept the Presidency to two terms until 1947 when we felt it necessary to make it a law. This law was enacted just two years after FDR died while serving in his fourth term. I don’t see this as being a coincidence.

As a people, I feel that Americans don’t like politicians to be elected for life. Unfortunately, today’s politicians tend to like their jobs too much and want to stay. When they do leave due to term limits or lost elections, they seek other public offices. So, you tend to see these same people running for different offices. Or, in the case of another notable, they move from 1st Lady to Senator, then towards President.
 
I think this question is only relevant for the current president, who is absolutely loathed. Every office needs term limits, & there is no reason why the same senator should be in place for 20-some years. This kind of complaceny causes what I'll just call the "fat-cat" effect. Less working for the people, less need to worry about your track record, and more greed.
While Im sure it would be nice to have 4 year limits with the same ole president, the real issue the numbers of parties. There needs to be minimum 3 or more parties instead of the same stodgee two with that end up pitching the same old information and being clones of each other. And in the end all their pie in the sky promises arn't met or acted on because they owe some many favors to the companies that got them there, that they don't work for the people either. The system is broken and rotten to the core, & will probably never, ever be fixed. Yeah Deomocracy! Boo to the entire leadership.
 
Oh I don't think he is absolutely loathed. If that is the general consenus in Texas I would be surprised. Of course since he has not done anything about the border I could be wrong about Texas.

Anyways the President does have term limits, I believe we should extend them to the Reps and Senators in Congress, two terms in each house. Maybe three since the Reps have such a short term.

And also maybe a Twenty or Thirty year limit for a Supreme Court Judge, with no reappointments.

Would love to see a limit on how many years a lobbysist or staffer could work in D.C. or be affilated with a firm that works in D.C. But that is truely pie-in-the-sky dreaming. The behind the scenes people are probably about half the problem, people that know how to gum up the works, people that know the ins and out of power plays.

Terms limits for Congressman, that would clear things up a bit.


Of course we keep (the country as a whole) voting the same guys in, so we get what we deserve.
 
From what I have read and researched thus far, the Founders were split somewhat on the issue of term limits. Some were in the camp of letting the people decide, even if the people were stupid and kept voting in the devil, they deserve what they get. And the other side was concerned with elective despotism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top