While I mostly agree with the sentiment of term limiting members of the U.S. Congress, accomplishing it would require a Constitutional amendment. This would first have to be passed by Congress, not likely they would vote to eliminate their own jobs, and then ratified by the states. A lofty goal, but not at all likely to happen.

Term limits already exist for every single elected official; it is called an election.

The problem with the majority of those wanting to see term limits established is two fold. First, the good effective leaders are removed from where they may well be the best option. Second, it helps in keeping the electorate lazy.

Our cities, counties, states, and federal, elected officials are what we the voters allow them to become. When the people are engaged in the process of what those put into office are doing the quality those individuals improves.

Want elected officials that serve their intended purpose of best serving the interest of the people; become involved. There is no other solution in assuring the caliber of those elected to serve.

Depending on elections to effect limiting the term(s) pols can remain in office does have one serious problem, one only too readily apparent in the 2008 national election. The fatal flaw is that 47% of the people work for a living, the other 53% vote for a living.

apmastrangelo.....wrong. term limits are as near an answer as we'll find. Today the "system" is so gerry-rigged no one can over come it. What is it , 98% of incumbents that choose to file for re-election, are re-elected. It's simple they have "fixed" the election and Wright Winger put the icing on the cake with over 50% of the "voters" who look to government for everything.

And, now Obama has dumped over 10 BILLION dollars on his "organizers" ( ACORN & AMERIPRISE) No one has a chanch...especially when those two get done with the census. We won't have any "illegals"....we'll merely have 20 million more Obama supporters....voting.

lbc - You make the case better than I have.
Your solution is to restrict the good with the bad. The bad remain because of those not participating. I contend term limits do as much harm as good. You can not legislate good representation as it is a product of those putting individuals in office, leading to;
WW - Given your argument term limits or not the environment can not be changed so why would you look to restrict those doing the job you see as effective.

In Missouri, we do have term limits for our legislatures and it is a mess.

apmastrangelo is correct in his assertion that elections should be our term limits; however, the public as a whole, is apparently too lazy and disinterested to actually learn about the candidates and issues and vote accordingly--or even vote at all! He is correct, also, that term limits remove the good with the bad.

Another thing term limits do is create a completely inept legislature from time to time (as if it needed help in that area)--the learning curve is so steep that it takes at least a couple of years for incoming legislators to even understand what they are doing. As with any new job, a training period should be expected--but with the legislature, we don't have the luxury of waiting around while the newbies figure out which end is up.

Maybe the people who devote the majority of their time and energy to trying to shove things like term limits down our throats, should try, instead, to spend some time educating potential voters on the candidates, the electoral process, and the importance of voting. Maybe, if they spent more time on those sorts of things, we would not need legislatively-enacted term limits to keep government fresh and free of corruption.

And then there is the issue of the Electoral College, which to say the least, should be completely and totally unnecessary in this day and age of public education and instant access to the media...

There is only one way to make term limits happen: By NEVER REELECTING anyone in Congress, the American voter could IMPOSE term limits on Congress.

In other words, don't let anyone serve more than one term. That's the only way to teach them that the voter is the boss! The “one term limit” can be eased AFTER we citizens get control of Congress.

Congress will never allow us to constitutionally term limit them. Our only choice is to NEVER REELECT them.

Remember too, it makes no difference who you vote for, as long as it is NEVER for any incumbent!

A Congress of freshmen who don’t take reelection for granted would be a trove of creative new ideas.

It is too bad we don't have term limits on local politicians as well. I have talked to a few employees at the court house who say their boss leaves early on Friday and calls in sick on Monday and takes 2 to 4 hour lunch breaks. I hope they document that kind of stuff and take it to the paper when the election comes next year so we can get her out of office. But the crying shame is because she is an incumbent, she will probably win.

Please sign the online petition for Congressional term limits at www.termlimits.org.

Also, not to disparage any other, but U.S. Term Limits is the premiere term limits group in the nation. It has been active in term limits campaigns across the country since the early 1990s and has both political and educational arms.

apmastrangelo...you are on the right track. Term limits have their weak spot but at the moment we get two kinds of congresspeople...we get a few independently wealthy who have their own agenda.....then we have some scumbags who begin as an assistant prosecuting attorney...and work their way up. After 30+ years they show up as the "leadership"...ie: Barney Frank, Henry Waxman, Joe Biden...the bottom of the barrel. We get an occasional "good canidate" and after one or two terms they ae so frustatetd they return to the real world.

AS far as getting it done, many years ago I suggested to a newly elected Congressperson that they try to advance "term limits".......effective 25 years hence. Thinking it was far enough down the pike than many would say "it is the right thing to do....and doesn't effect me". Another option would be to grandfather existing members so they would not feel threatened.

There are many good folks who at age 45-55 or so have made a few bucks and if they felt 4 to 8 years would make a difference, they might run. As it is, knowling they will never get very far because of seniority, they find other things to do with their lives.