Term limits are popular with those too lazy to vote

WASHINGTON -- The term limits movement has always been the Couch Potato movement in disguise.

Too lazy to actually go to the ballot box and vote, the backers of term limits want their votes cast for them.

Instead of having to get up off the couch to throw the bums out, they want the bums thrown out automatically.

Instead of having to go through the mental agony of deciding who is a good member of Congress and who is bad one, they want everybody thrown out after a certain number of terms.

Term limit supporters want to change Congress like they change channels on their TV sets: Without any heavy lifting.

In reality, term limits exist already. They are called The Vote.

You don't like your jackass member of Congress?

Fine. Vote against him.

You do like your wise and responsive member of Congress?

Fine. Vote to keep him.

This is what we call democracy.

Term limit backers call it too much trouble.

So why are term limits so popular in public opinion polls, and why have they passed in state after state?

For the same reason people like to get ice out of their refrigerator doors: Labor-saving devices make life so easy.

But our constitutional system does, unfortunately, make some demands on us. Like going to a polling place on Election Day.

Which is what the Supreme Court said Monday.

It said states could not change the Constitution and impose term limits. The only way to get term limits, the court said, is to amend the Constitution.

But the framers of the Constitution wanted term limits, supporters of the movement claim. They wanted "citizen-legislators" who would ride their horses to Congress, stay for a short time and then ride back to tend their farms.

History, however, indicates differently: The Articles of Confederation, adopted by the original 13 states, imposed term limits on members of Congress, but these limits were dropped when the Constitution was written in 1787.

The Founding Fathers were, in fact, very aware of the problems of term limits.

James Madison wrote in one of his Federalist Papers: "A few members . . . will possess superior talents; will by frequent re-elections, become members of long standing, will be thoroughly masters of the public business. . . . The greater the proportion of new members . . . the more apt they be to fall into the snares that may be laid for them."

The Founding Fathers never counted on Couch Potatoes, however. They saw democracy as such a great gift to the nation, they never imagined that citizens would become bored by it or find it a burden because it cuts into their leisure time.

Today, term limits would fill Congress with amateurs who would be at the mercy of the bureaucrats, the congressional staffs and the lobbyists. In addition, term limits would shift even more power to the presidency.

"It is hard to imagine a greater boon for the Imperial President," wrote historian Arthur Schlesinger, "than to purge Congress of experienced legislators who are specialists in issues, who know the workings of government and who remember where bodies are buried."

The term limits people are now left with but one way to achieve their aim: a constitutional amendment approved by both houses of Congress and three-fourths of the states.

In March, however, the House rejected such an amendment, falling 63 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed.

"If they want to get rid of any of us, they can," House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt said. "And, I might add, they are doing a pretty good job of it."

So if the people don't like their members of Congress, they can just vote them out and vote new ones in. They don't need term limits to do that.

But, wait. The president has a term limit, doesn't he?

Yes, he does. Angered by the four terms won by Franklin Roosevelt, Republicans began pushing for the 22nd Amendment in 1946 when they took control of Congress. It was ratified in 1951 and was known as the "Republicans' Revenge."

But what has happened since?

The only two presidents forced to retire because of it have been Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan.

So who got the revenge?