For that reason and others, the Constitutional Convention unanimously rejected term limits and the First Congress soundly defeated two subsequent term-limit proposals. Hamilton, who did not even support term limitations on the presidency, reasoned that imposing limits "would be a diminution of the inducements to good behavior." Madison said that some members of Congress will "by frequent re-elections, become members of long-standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business." In fact, that has been the case. Over the years, term limits would have unseated Daniel Webster and Henry Clay 10 years before they forged the 1850 Compromise that held the Union together. Term limits would have cost us Everett Dirksen, who rallied Republicans around early civil-rights bills and Florida's own Claude Pepper, who long defended Social Security and Medicare against revenue raids. It was not the Federalists but their adversaries who clamored for term limits, perhaps because they were then out of power. Robert Livingston said it best at the New York convention to ratify the Constitution: "The people are the best judges who ought to represent them. To dictate and control them, to tell them who they shall not elect, is to abridge their natural rights." T.K. Wetherel Speaker Florida House of Representatives Tallahassee, Fla.
The idea of term limits for legislators is not new. We once had them. They kept James Madison out of legislative service at a critical time during our early nation building years. However, the constitutional convention unanimously rejected them and the First Congress soundly defeated two subsequent term-limit proposals. Today we hear many of the same pro and con arguments that were expressed then. Robert Livingston may have said it best, "The people are the best judges [of] who ought to represent them. To dictate and control them, to tell them who they shall not elect, is to abridge their natural rights."