Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Term Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rules committee advances resolution seeking convention to propose congressional term limits
Summary
The Senate Rules Committee voted to advance a resolution calling on states to convene an Article V convention limited to proposing a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of the U.S. House and Senate; the measure moves forward after a committee vote that recorded three opposing votes.
The Senate Rules Committee on Thursday voted to advance Senate Resolution 23, a measure calling for a Constitution‑amendment convention limited to proposing term limits for members of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate.
Senator Kauser, the resolution’s sponsor, told the committee the measure “is a call for a constitutional amendment convention for 1 single purpose to propose a constitutional amendment to limit the terms of office of members of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate.” He cited Article V of the U.S. Constitution, which provides two methods to propose amendments: a two‑thirds vote of both congressional chambers or a convention called by two‑thirds of the states. Kauser noted that a proposed amendment still requires ratification by three‑quarters of the states to become part of the Constitution.
The resolution’s sponsor and several senators discussed perceived problems with long incumbencies in Congress. Kauser said members of Congress “are unlikely to limit their own terms of office” and pointed to high incumbent re‑election rates. Senator Beach voiced a concern often raised during the exchange, saying one downside of term limits is that “you are now shifting institutional knowledge, therefore power from an elected official to your bureaucrats and to your lobbyist.” Another senator suggested restoring a part‑time Congress would naturally increase turnover.
Committee procedure produced a motion to advance the resolution. Senator Albers moved “do pass,” and Senator Dolezal seconded. The chair called the vote; the committee recorded three opposing votes and then advanced the resolution to the rules calendar.
The committee did not adopt policy language beyond forwarding the resolution; no statutory or legislative text was amended in the committee. The measure will appear again in the rules committee and proceed according to the Senate’s calendar rules.
