by Wade Holt
Across the political spectrum, Americans agree on very little. But there is one reform that draws rare, overwhelming consensus: term limits for members of Congress.
A September 2023 survey by the Pew Research Center found that 87% of Americans support term limits for Congress. A March 2023 study from the University of Maryland found 83% support for a constitutional amendment establishing term limits — including 80% of Democrats, 86% of Republicans, and 84% of Independents.
This is not a partisan issue. It is an American issue.
For more than thirty years, states have tried to express this will. In the early 1990s, many states passed their own term-limit laws for federal offices, only to see them struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court’s message was clear: if the people want term limits for Congress, the Constitution must be amended.
Article V provides two ways to do that. Congress can propose amendments — or the states can.
That second path is the focus of the Convention of States Project, which asks state legislatures to apply for a convention limited to proposing amendments that include term limits, fiscal restraints, and limits on federal power.
Americans are increasingly alarmed by the federal government’s unsustainable spending and rising debt. For decades, citizens have called for a balanced budget amendment, yet Congress has never seriously advanced one to the states. Regardless of which party holds power, Washington has shown little appetite for placing binding limits on itself.
The Framers anticipated that Congress might one day resist limiting its own power. That is why they gave the states a remedy.
Supporters of J.R.H.1 argue that this is precisely why Article V exists — as a constitutional remedy when Congress proves unwilling to address structural problems of its own making.
If 34 states apply, Congress must call the convention. Any amendment proposed would still require 38 states to ratify before becoming law.
This is a constitutional process, not a political protest.
Recently, Kansas became the 20th state to pass such a resolution. Only 14 more are needed to trigger the process.
Here in Vermont, the resolution is J.R.H.1. Yet despite the broad public support for term limits and the constitutional nature of the proposal, the legislation has struggled to receive even a hearing for discussion and a vote.
That is the real issue.
Legislators are elected to represent their constituents, not to decide which ideas are permitted to be discussed. When proposals with overwhelming public support are prevented from even reaching the committee table, it sends a troubling message: that Vermonters cannot be trusted to evaluate the merits of a constitutional process for themselves.
Reasonable people can disagree about whether an Article V convention is the right approach. But preventing the discussion entirely denies Vermonters a voice in a matter where the public has clearly spoken.
Term limits are popular because many Americans believe Congress has become disconnected from the people it serves. The same frustrations are often voiced about state and local government. Whether one supports or opposes J.R.H.1, the people of Vermont deserve an open debate and a recorded vote from their representatives.
That is how representative government is supposed to work.
If you believe Vermonters deserve to have their voices heard on this issue, contact your representative and ask them to support giving J.R.H.1 a fair hearing. Meanwhile, you can go to conventionofstates.com and sign the petition that will be sent to your representative, letting them know that you are in favor of reining in our Congress.
Let the discussion happen. Let the vote happen. Let Vermonters be heard.