Should We Impose Political Expiration Dates for 'Out With the Old' on Capitol Hill?
Fifty-nine years.
That’s how long the late Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., spent in Congress.
Longer than some of us will be alive, let alone stuck in the same job.
When Dingell first came to Washington, D.C. Dwight Eisenhower was calling the shots at the White House.
Fast forward 11 presidents, and Dingell was still in office.
But we shouldn’t single out John Dingell.
He’s in good, long-standing company with many current officeholders.
Take Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, clocking in at 49 years, or Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., trailing closely with 47 years.
Guess what?
They aren’t leaving Congress anytime soon, with years still left on their current terms.
In what universe does this scream healthy democracy?
It doesn’t.
America’s Founders probably wouldn’t recognize such long tenures in office.
The best example we have of this is George Washington, who could have been president for life, clinging to power as long as he deemed fit.
Instead, just as Washington relinquished his sword after defeating the British, he bowed out after two terms as president.
Sadly, today, this sounds crazy.
Yet our nation's first president was onto something.
Perilously, term limits have become the political equivalent of a unicorn — everyone finds them compelling, but they’re still seemingly mythical in D.C.
Voters from all walks of life, from conservatives to liberals, overwhelmingly agree on placing term limits on members of Congress.
In fact, eight out of 10 Americans favor a constitutional amendment imposing term limits. And 16 states currently have term limits for their legislators.
The only place where this trend hasn’t taken hold seems to be Capitol Hill.
But why the resistance to such a popular, no-brainer-reform among voters?
One favorite line used by, you guessed it, career politicians, is that term limits would remove years of experience from Congress.
"Experience"?
Certainly. Those who have been in Congress for decades do have experience.
It’s in filibustering and fundraising.
Imagine future Congresses that included more doctors, small business owners, engineers and teachers.
Term limits would give those in such careers and others the chance to serve, giving them a better handle on policies than those who have been in government for most of their lives.
Then there’s the doomsday argument of the anti-term limit camp: that such limits would plunge the government into chaos with so many new elected officials shuffling in and out of the system.
But could a new crop of legislators really be that much worse?
We’re talking about replacing a crew whose approval rating hovers around 20%.
The data also reveals that states with term limits like Florida, South Dakota and Missouri all enjoy fiscal ratings that make them the envy of neighboring states.
Compare them to those with no term limits: New York, Illinois and Pennsylvania, which represent some of the most dysfunctional states in the nation.
The most popular argument used against term limits is that such measures are undemocratic.
Since voters can make their voices heard at the ballot box in elections, there’s no need for limits according to this logic.
Sounds great in a high school civics class, but back in reality, it’s a different story.
The truth is that incumbents enjoy multiple advantages that challengers lack, including name recognition, endless media coverage, and tons of cold hard cash.
What's "democratic" about that?
Special interest groups and lobbyists are much more likely to give to incumbents over challengers, giving a leg up to anyone presently in office.
Is it any wonder why over 90% of incumbents are returned to office?
But, it’s not all doom and gloom.
Our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, left us tools to fix this mess.
Congress could pass a constitutional amendment for term limits in minutes.
Getting this amendment adopted by over three-fourths of the states would be a cakewalk.
History shows us that when term limits hit the ballot, voters don’t just like them, they love them. There’s no reason to think federal term limits wouldn’t attract the same level of enthusiasm, if not adoration.
It’s time for a return to the citizen legislature, infusing Congress with new ideas and fresh perspectives that are needed to tackle America’s challenges.
Eight to 12 years in office is more than enough time to contribute — or, let’s face it, muck things up.
More open seats would create more competitive elections, giving voters a reason to show up at the polls instead of skipping over a forgone conclusion.
It seems the only groups resisting term limits are current officeholders and their lobbyist friends. Their vehement opposition almost makes you think we’re onto something good here.
Term limits are the refresh button American democracy desperately needs right now.
Jacob Lane is a Republican strategist and school choice activist. He has worked for GOP campaigns at the federal, state and local levels, as well as with various PACs and nonprofits. Read Jacob Lane's Reports — More Here.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.