Summary: Bar candidates from federal office if they’d surpass America’s average lifespan (75 per CDC goal) by term’s end—it’s about finishing the job, not dying mid-job.
Problem: Too many of our elected officials have become walking corpses: able to breathe and maintain a heartbeat throughout a congressional session, but unable to make sound decisions on their own. 33 lawmakers hit our 75 cutoff now—Grassley’s 89 (Senate), Pelosi’s 82 (House)—pushing policies they won’t outlive, leaving us stuck.
Solution: No running if age + term length tops the proposed 75-year life expectancy. A 70-year-old can’t run for a 6-year Senate seat (76+ by 2031); a 74-year-old can’t run for a 2-year House seat (76+ by 2027). Adjust as lifespans shift.
Benefits: Leaders stay accountable, living with their choices instead of dumping messes on us. It cuts mid-term vacancy costs and nudges reps to hit life expectancy targets—their limit too.
Fair fix to align leaders with our lives, or too harsh? Vote and weigh in!
Term limits for all elected officials makes perfect sense. The founding fathers intended for government positions as service for the people not career opportunities. Serve one or two terms and go back to private life. No permanent salaries and benefits after you leave office. The current situation is userious.
We will need a state convention under Article IV to change. The Constitution is one of the greatest documents in the world, but they forgot man’s greed. At first, congressmen and senators received no salary and were only compensated for travel expense. The end was in site when they voted in salaries for themselves and thus made career politicans. After seceding from England, where members of parliament served life terms and the king until his death, it is tragic that the founding fathers failed to notice this problem.
I believe you mean an “Article V” Convention of States. That is absolutely right, Congress will not voluntarily limit their own terms (which would have to be done by a Constitutional amendment).
The average lifespan was much shorter in 1787 when the Constitution was drafted., and the founders didn’t consider it an issue.
But, prior to the Seventeenth amendment ratification in 1913, the terms of Senators was very different.
Let’s look at the “Class 3” Senate seat in New York held currently by Chuck Schumer. Schumer is 27th Senator to hold that seat, 20 of which held it prior the Seventeenth amendment (1789-1915), with the longest it was held by a single person was 14 years, and some held it less than a year (one didn’t make it 90 days). During that time, no politician left the office for health reasons or died in office. On average most served just under 6 years.
Fast forward to post Seventeenth amendment and things change drastically. In those 110 years, there have only been 7 to hold that seat, with the shortest term being 5 months, but the average amongst those 7 is over 15 1/2 years in office, with the current occupant, Chuck Schumer holding it for a whopping 26 years. One politician resigned due to being in ill health, and for this particular seat nobody has died in office.
To me, that says the Founders had it right in 1787 by having the State Legislatures select their Senators, and it was working (yes there were occasional vacancies, but the longest vacancy in the “Class 3” seat was just shy of a year, most averaged 5 1/2 months), and the progressives that moved for direct election of Senators in the early 20th Century had it wrong.
Do I support term limits (either by age or by terms or both)? Absolutely! Do I support repealing the Seventeenth Amendment? I think that would move us back towards the Constitutional Republic we’re supposed to be.