Connect with us


GOP Senator and Dem fmr. Governor: It’s time for term limits in Congress



ed rendell pat toomey

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) and former Gov. Ed Rendell (D-Penn.) co-authored an op-ed calling for the introduction of a constitutional amendment to set term limits for members of Congress.

“Our elected representatives seem afraid to do anything that would jeopardize their reelection,” the bipartisan Pennsylvanian duo argued. “Term limits allow them to operate without that pressure, secure in the knowledge that they are not risking the position that could be a lifetime career. They would be able to cast votes knowing that the risk they are taking would not jeopardize their entire future.”

The piece, published Tuesday in The Philadelphia Inquirer, seeks to re-energize the movement to introduce term limits for Congress. While not advocating for anything new in particular, Toomey and Rendell lay out a case for term limits and why they think they should be adopted, and they frame their argument in terms of the worsening gridlock.

“We recall a time not too long ago when the House and Senate could regularly put divisions aside to address the big issues facing our country,” they write. “Think of the early 2000s when, in response to the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, Congress overwhelmingly approved several measures that created the Department of Homeland Security, established more stringent safety guidelines at airports, and helped Ground Zero first responders.”

“Now, in the midst of another crisis, members of Congress frequently focus more on blaming each other than on finding solutions,” the piece continues. “Entrenched politicians have been steering the ship of state for decades and — don’t look now — we’re about to hit a $25 trillion national debt iceberg. It’s time for a new approach.”

For a long while, congressional term limits has had broad, albeit tepid, bipartisan support.

During the 2016 campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump advocated for term limits as part of his plan to “drain the swamp.” In April 2018, President Trump met with a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers who were pushing for term limits, but the effort soon lost steam. Since then, term limits have sunk to the bottom of Washington, DC’s legislative priorities while the gridlock has worsened.

Placing term limits on members of Congress would require a constitutional amendment, according to the Supreme Court. Achieving this is the most daunting obstacle for the movement.

For this to happen: either two-thirds of Congress has to vote to ratify such an amendment, or at least 34 state legislatures have to apply for a constitutional convention to kick off the long, grueling process. Moreover, once a constitutional convention has drafted an amendment, 38 state legislatures have to ratify it before it’s tacked onto the Constitution.

However, the movement’s fiercest opposition is the very person they would need on their side to make this work: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). The three-decade lawmaker opposed term limits, saying at a 2016 press conference, “I would say we have term limits now. They’re called elections. And it will not be on the agenda in the Senate.”

With Senate Republicans going all-in on appointing Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court before November 3, there’s likely no room on the agenda for term limits in the near future.

While using the gridlock brought about by the pandemic as a pretext for introducing term limits, the cornucopia of issues brought about by this very pandemic has denied term limits receiving even a scant moment in the spotlight. But, the pandemic won’t last forever. Once this chaos ultimately subsides, perhaps term limits will finally find their moment under the sun. But that will have to wait for now.

You can follow Douglas Braff on Twitter @Douglas_P_Braff.

You may like

Continue Reading


PJ Media report: SHOCKER! WaPo Update About Mar-A-Lago Raid Doesn’t Fit the Narrative



Screen Shot 2022 08 09 at 6.39.11 AM

PJ Media’s Kevin Downey Jr. has dissected a Washington Post report regarding findings from the raid of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. “Shocker! WaPo Update About Mar-A-Lag0 Raid Doesn’t Fit the Narrative” Downey Jr.’s report is titled.

“Remember when the FBI raided Trump’s home supposedly looking for “nuclear secrets” a few months back? Guess how that turned out?” the article begins.

I’ll let the quislings at the Washinton Post spell it out:

Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.

In other words, Trump was keeping souvenirs, as everyone else does.

Funny how WaPo sat on that story until after the midterms, right?

But wait, there’s more!

That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.

The WaPo also found no evidence that Trump was looking to “leverage, sell or use the government secrets.”

They threw the idea in near the very end that they still might come up with something juicy:

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.

Continue Reading: PJ Media

You may like

Continue Reading

Trending Now



Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC