Christensen 1

Sierra Christensen

A02245064

Reforming the House of Representatives’ Term Lengths and Limits

The Congressional House of Representatives current has a term length of two years.1

However this length is not effective because a Representative has to start campaigning and

fundraising for re-election immediately after starting: giving no time to focus on actual doing the

job they were elected to do. This makes our Congressmen and women “part-time” despite their

role as our main policy makers. The House of Representatives’ terms should be lengthened and

limited to one term to stop campaigning for re-election being that constant distraction from

Congressional duties, and help them to be nonpartisan enough to make decisions for the good of

the whole country and not to appease their constituents and lobbyists in the hopes of getting

reelected.

Tim Roemer, was a Congressional representative for Indiana from 1991 to 2003, was on

the 9/11 Commission and was also a United States ambassador in India from 2009 to 2011.2

Roemer wrote an article discussing the campaigning costs and high demands that he had to

endure, and how they have gotten worse since his time as a Congressman. In his article, Roemer

says our Congressmen and women can only do their jobs “part-time … despite a $174,000

salary”3 because they have to spend so much time raising more money to run again, and because

they have to start that process over 596 days before election (compared to France’s two-week

1
House.gov “The House Explained” pg. 1
2
Roemer, T. “Why do Congressmen Spend Only Half their time Serving Us?” pg. 1
3
Roemer, T. “Why do Congressmen Spend Only Half their time Serving Us?” pg. 1
 Christensen 2

elections and Canada’s 11-day elections.)4 The absurd length of Congressional campaigns

combined with the staggering costs of those campaigns leaves Congressmen and women trapped

in a cyclical trap of despair.

The issue of part-time Congressmen is mostly caused by two facts—one being that

American campaigns are disturbingly longer than most other countries, and that the cost of

running a campaign is ridiculously high. Roemer continues in his article that in 1990 he raised

$850,000 for his campaign, but even since then the cost of a Congressional seat has raised by

344 percent.5 Essentially, this article and many others like it take the statistics and facts that

prove that campaigning and pandering to constituents overwhelms Congressmen and women

who have been elected and who are being paid to use their expertise to lead our country in

policies that are for the general good and support of American peoples.

Representative John Larson is yet another House member that has proposed increase the

term length to four years; his specific reason being the pressure of constant fundraising. In an

interview with ​The Hill​, Larson spoke about the first thing both parties tell a newcomer to

Washington, “Get on the phone and start raising money again. You've got an election coming

up.”6 Larson had just been elected to do his best policy work from a position of esteem in the

United States government, but instead was told that his first priority was not mastering the

issues, but to begin fundraising for an election years ahead. Larson continues in that interview

4
Roemer, T. “Why do Congressmen Spend Only Half their time Serving Us?” pg. 1
5
Roemer, T. “Why do Congressmen Spend Only Half their time Serving Us?” pg. 1
6
Marcos, C. “Should House Members Serve Four-Year Terms” pg. 1
 Christensen 3

with ​The Hill​ in saying, “I think that we ought to reverse that priority."7 It is clear that he is

correct in his opinion.

When one thinks of the most prestigious and trustworthy organization of the US

government, the Supreme Court often comes to mind. The nine Justices are appointed based on

their ability to make decisions well, based on logic and morals rather than their political

affiliation. They are often seen as above corruption and because they have an uneven number of

justices, gridlock is not an issue, at odds in all aspects with Congress.

Congress has a shocking lack of public trust, gridlocks constantly, and almost 73.4% of

Representatives vote with their parties automatically instead of carefully studying the issue.8

According to a 2017 Gallup poll, 47 percent of Americans have little or no confidence in

Congress, compared to the 17 percent of people who have little confidence in the Supreme

Court.9 As for gridlocks, the only evidence needed to cement that knowledge is the series of

government shutdowns earlier in 2018 with the fiscal budget, and the fact that the number of

gridlocks has doubled since 195010: leaving 70 percent of legislative issues in gridlock as of

2012.11

There is a commonly accepted theory in the articles written to advocate for lengthening

terms. The theory is that when a Congressional electorates only have one term to do everything

they want to accomplish, they would be motivated to do as much as they can while they are in

7
Marcos, C. “Should House Members Serve Four-Year Terms” pg. 1
8
Reynolds, M. “Vital Statistics on Congress” ch.8—pg. 6
9
Gallup Poll “Confidence in Institutions” pg. 1
10
Ingram C. “Congressional gridlock has doubled since the 1950’s” pg. 1
11
Binder, S. “Polarized We Govern” pg. 1
 Christensen 4

office. Unfettered by fundraising and campaigning demands and motivated by the knowledge

that they will ​not ​be re-elected, congressmen and women will achieve much more and be less

complacent with constant gridlock that prevents their bills from passing. This raised level of

activism from Congress, particularly the House of Representatives, will also increase public

support.

The way to gain support for Congress is through systematic and individual reform. If

Congressmen and women were able and willing to honestly put forth all their effort into creating

and supporting laws that protect American rights and ideals—whatever those may be—our

political system would be less polarized, more cooperative between parties, (meaning less apt to

fall into gridlock) and have better approval ratings from the public.

Of course, because of the outrageous prices of campaigning, any candidate who is not a

“one-percenter” will be dependent on lobbyists and the one-percenters who decide to use their

money for corrupting and self-serving donations to those candidates. In response, let us as a

country focus on one reform at a time.

Logistically, the House of Representatives’ terms should be lengthened to four years, and

limited to one term in the House. Limiting a politician to one term in the office would also

reduce career incumbents who hold seats for themselves instead of letting a higher turn-over

encourage other politicians, specifically minorities, to run for office. Current House members

would finish their two-year terms, and those who have already spent over $50,000 towards their

next campaign could run again, but any newly elected or soon-to-be elected officials would serve

the new four year term and not be allowed to run again.
 Christensen 5

The term limit solves the problem of Congressmen only working part-time on their

congressional duties. The extended length also gives Congressmen twice the time to become

experts in their committee topics and issues—allowing them to better serve us and more

efficiently serve their peers in the House and Senate, and other branches of the federal

government.

While most people strongly believes that Congressional reform is definitely needed, there

are several people who argue what the best way to accomplish that is. Bill Frenzel, who spoke to

a Congressional subcommittee back in 1997, claims that the best solution (which was his idea) is

a 12-year term limit12. However, the only situation in which a 12-year limit would be reasonable

is when paired with the ineffective two-year terms, not the much better four-year terms that have

much more support as the first-priority Congressional reform.

The ​Christian Science Monitor​ published an article in 1998 that argued any term lengths

are detrimental, because the best candidate for the job may be an incumbent.13 The problem with

this that even with a term limit, candidates can still run for jobs in other parts of the government.

There is an abundance of government roles and positions that do not have term limits that highly

approved incumbents can run for. If they are as approved of as this argument necessitates, then

they will be elected to that position.

In conclusion, the Congressional House of Representatives current term system are not

effective because campaigning for re-election is too distracting from Congressional duties, and

12
Frenzel, B. “Limiting Terms of Office for Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of
Representatives” pg. 1
13
Christian Science Monitor. “Limited Appeal” pg. 12
 Christensen 6

as the policy makers of our country, they should be nonpartisan enough to make decisions for the

good of the whole country and not to satisfy their lobbyists, benefactors or constituents in the

hopes of getting reelected. Lengthening the term to four years and limiting a Congressman or

woman to one term will solve this issue of pandering to their financial benefactors and rich

constituents, and the issue of Representatives being forced to do their entire Congressional job

only part-time instead of the full-time that it requires.

 Christensen 7

Works Cited

Binder, Sarah A. “Polarized We Govern?” ​Brookings​, The Brookings Institution, 28 July 2016,

www.brookings.edu/research/polarized-we-govern/.

“Confidence in Institutions.” ​Gallup.com​, Gallup, 2017, news.gallup.com/poll/1597/

Confidence-Institutions.aspx.

Frenzel, Bill. “Limiting Terms of Office for Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of

Representatives.” ​Brookings​, The Brookings Institution, 28 July 2016,

www.brookings.edu/testimonies/limiting-terms-of-office-for-members-of-the-u-s-senate-

and-u-s-house-of-representatives/.

"Limited Appeal." ​Christian Science Monitor​, vol. 90, no. 127, 28 May 1998, p. 12. EBSCO​host​,

dist.lib.usu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&

AN=650037&site=ehost-live.

Marcos, Cristina. “Should House Members Serve Four-Year Terms?” ​The Hill​, The Hill, 4 Feb.

2016, thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/203660-should-house-members-

serve-four-year-terms.

Reynolds, Molly E. “Vital Statistics on Congress.” ​Brookings​, The Brookings Institution, 7 Sept.

2017, www.brookings.edu/multi-chapter-report/vital-statistics-on-congress/.

“The House Explained.” ​The House Explained​, House.gov,

www.house.gov/the-house-explained.