The Evolution of Term Limits in America

 One of the most controversial topics in American politics in recent years is that of Congressional term limits.  In the 20th and 21st Centuries, we’ve seen career politicians hold office for decades.  As I think about this topic, I contemplate whether this concept is valuable or destructive to American freedom and democracy.  Who gains from such incumbency, are there benefits, are there drawbacks from allowing elected officials to hold office for the greater part of their adult life? While analyzing such a topic, I began researching the evolution of term limits in America.  Here is my story:

In early 19th Century society, politics was seen as a civic duty rather than a profession.  The Founding Fathers imagined a citizen-legistator model to the political arena of the early United States of America.  These citizen-legislators would be made up of farmers, lawyers, and merchants alike who would serve briefly then return home.  Many early members of the American Congress served just one or two terms before heading home.  Travel was difficult, pay was low, and there weren’t permanent political parties.  

It wasn’t until the 1820s and 1830s the political arena began to evolve under Jacksonian democracy.  The establishment of the Democratic Party and the Whigs changed American politics forever.  As voter turnout grew exponentially due to the restrictions of land ownership being a factor in voter rights being lifted, by 1840 turnout was over 80%.  As a result of increased turnout, it brought about party machines and competitive elections.  Party organizations needed experienced leaders to keep power, so staying in office became a much more common practice.  The Democratic Party pioneered campaign rallies, slogans, party newspapers, and conventions to mobilize ordinary voters. By the late 1800’s, long congressional tenures were commonplace.  

  By the early 1900’s, legislators saw a boost in pay, pension plans, and committee seniority, and so public service became a full-time job.  Following WWII, America saw a rise in mass media, fundraising systems, and after the 1970s party primaries began, which favored incumbency, making long careers common.   

After analyzing how history culminated in the evolution of long term, career politicians, we sit at a crossroads in American History.  Do we sit back and allow the status quo to continue with business as usual, or do we strive for change in the American political arena.  Who benefits from the status quo?  First and foremost, the politicians themselves.  The longer someone stays in power, the more corrupt they become.  Corporations have something to gain in incumbency.  The more money they pour into a continuous campaign of a Congressional and/or Committee leader, the more favor that party member shows in return.  If someone could only hold two terms, money couldn’t corrupt politics and members of Congress compared to its juxtaposition.  On the other hand, Congressional members are democratically elected officials.  In the democratic process, citizens have the power of the vote to decide who they wish to hold public office, but who is to say primaries and party funding don’t hold the incumbent in favor over new “talent.”  In the end, it is for you to decide the fate of party politics and term limits in America.