Recently, a hot-bed of debate has been occurring across the country with regard to Term Limits. With congressional approval at all-time lows, proponents of a Term Limit Amendment, point out that now is the opportune time to pass this kind of legislation.
Some even go so far as suggesting a "Convention of the States to Amend the Constitution" to achieve this goal.
Now, I agree there are some good things that can be accomplished with this type of action; Term Limits are not the answer we seek.
As a voting member of Washington State, I participate in election cycles just as my friends and relatives do in Pennsylvania. Each year I am presented with choices on who I want to represent me in Congress.
Sometimes the candidate I vote for wins, sometimes they lose. Pennsylvanians are also given their choices.
What right do I, as a constituent of another state, have to tell you who you can and cannot vote for to represent you? Most of the 'disaproval' of Congress is pointed to members of other states.
Do I agree with Nancy Pelosi? No. Do I think her district needs different representation? Yes. But do I have the right to tell them they can no longer choose her to represent them? No.
Term Limits will not magically win seats for minority parties, and it will not fix Congressional gridlock. Blue districts will still elect blue Representatives, red states will still elect red Senators.
The only thing Term limits will do, is restrict a voting populaces ability to choose who they are allowed to represent their interests. If you want an incumbent out of your state, do the work. Campaign, donate, rally, vote.
If you don't like the people I choose to represent me, too bad. It's my state, my constituency, my vote.
Jeremiah J. Doebler
Submitted by Virtual Newsroom