Blab Politics
Public Backing for Congressional Term Limits Faces Practical Hurdles
Nearly nine in ten Americans back limiting the number of terms a member of Congress can serve, a figure that has held steady in multiple polls. A 2023 Pew Research Center survey found 90 % of respondents favored term limits, with 90 % of Republicans and 86 % of Democrats in that study supporting the idea.
The enthusiasm for term limits does not appear to be driven by how long lawmakers have served. Congressional Research Service data show that the 97th Congress, convened in 1981, had the lowest average tenure in modern history—7.3 years in the House and 7.5 years in the Senate. The 100th Congress, which began in 1987, averaged 9.0 years in the House and 9.6 years in the Senate. Approval ratings for the 97th Congress were 33.5 % and rose to 42.0 % for the 100th. Across the last ten Congresses, the average tenure has hovered around 9.2 years in the House and 11.0 years in the Senate, while the average approval rating has fallen to 19.5 % from 40.0 % in the preceding ten Congresses.
The relationship between tenure and approval is weak. When the last 25 Congresses are divided into five‑session blocks, the average years of service in each block is nearly identical, yet the approval rating drops by about ten points in the later block. This pattern suggests that longer service does not translate into higher public approval.
Long‑serving members also tend to be more effective lawmakers. A 2024 study by the Center for Effective Lawmaking identified Texas Representative Joaquin Castro as the most legislatively effective House Democrat in the 118th Congress. Castro, first elected in 2012, would have been barred from running for re‑election in 2024 under a six‑term maximum. The same study found that six of the ten most effective House Democrats in the 118th Congress would have been excluded by a two‑term limit, and only one would have survived a three‑term cap. In the Senate, six of the ten most effective Democratic senators in the 118th session had served more than two terms; a two‑term limit would have prevented Senator Jon Tester from running in 2018.
Research on the broader effects of term limits indicates that they can increase polarization and reduce economic growth. A 2024 review by University of Chicago professor Anthony Fowler concluded that “there are likely better solutions and reforms that do not sacrifice the desirable aspects of electoral accountability.”
One alternative that enjoys public support and does not require a constitutional amendment is the expansion of existing reforms that increase accountability and productivity. For example, proposals to strengthen ethics rules, improve transparency in campaign finance, and enhance the role of independent redistricting commissions are already gaining traction.
In the political arena, recent polling data show that Democratic candidates are outperforming expectations in many House and Senate races. In Washington’s 3rd District, a new Emerson College and Northwest Progressive Institute survey finds Democratic Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez ahead of Republican challenger John Braun by only one percentage point, with 11 % of likely voters undecided. The margin of error leaves the race open.
Meanwhile, a YouGov poll reports that none of President Trump’s current cabinet members have a net‑positive approval rating. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the highest‑rated cabinet member, sits at a net approval of –3 %, while Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche each trail at –16 %.
The debate over term limits continues as lawmakers weigh the trade‑offs between public demand for fresh representation and the practical need for experienced legislators. Until a constitutional amendment is enacted, the status quo—unlimited terms—remains in place, and the question of whether Congress should be re‑structured will likely remain a contentious issue in future elections.
The enthusiasm for term limits does not appear to be driven by how long lawmakers have served. Congressional Research Service data show that the 97th Congress, convened in 1981, had the lowest average tenure in modern history—7.3 years in the House and 7.5 years in the Senate. The 100th Congress, which began in 1987, averaged 9.0 years in the House and 9.6 years in the Senate. Approval ratings for the 97th Congress were 33.5 % and rose to 42.0 % for the 100th. Across the last ten Congresses, the average tenure has hovered around 9.2 years in the House and 11.0 years in the Senate, while the average approval rating has fallen to 19.5 % from 40.0 % in the preceding ten Congresses.
The relationship between tenure and approval is weak. When the last 25 Congresses are divided into five‑session blocks, the average years of service in each block is nearly identical, yet the approval rating drops by about ten points in the later block. This pattern suggests that longer service does not translate into higher public approval.
Long‑serving members also tend to be more effective lawmakers. A 2024 study by the Center for Effective Lawmaking identified Texas Representative Joaquin Castro as the most legislatively effective House Democrat in the 118th Congress. Castro, first elected in 2012, would have been barred from running for re‑election in 2024 under a six‑term maximum. The same study found that six of the ten most effective House Democrats in the 118th Congress would have been excluded by a two‑term limit, and only one would have survived a three‑term cap. In the Senate, six of the ten most effective Democratic senators in the 118th session had served more than two terms; a two‑term limit would have prevented Senator Jon Tester from running in 2018.
Research on the broader effects of term limits indicates that they can increase polarization and reduce economic growth. A 2024 review by University of Chicago professor Anthony Fowler concluded that “there are likely better solutions and reforms that do not sacrifice the desirable aspects of electoral accountability.”
One alternative that enjoys public support and does not require a constitutional amendment is the expansion of existing reforms that increase accountability and productivity. For example, proposals to strengthen ethics rules, improve transparency in campaign finance, and enhance the role of independent redistricting commissions are already gaining traction.
In the political arena, recent polling data show that Democratic candidates are outperforming expectations in many House and Senate races. In Washington’s 3rd District, a new Emerson College and Northwest Progressive Institute survey finds Democratic Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez ahead of Republican challenger John Braun by only one percentage point, with 11 % of likely voters undecided. The margin of error leaves the race open.
Meanwhile, a YouGov poll reports that none of President Trump’s current cabinet members have a net‑positive approval rating. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the highest‑rated cabinet member, sits at a net approval of –3 %, while Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche each trail at –16 %.
The debate over term limits continues as lawmakers weigh the trade‑offs between public demand for fresh representation and the practical need for experienced legislators. Until a constitutional amendment is enacted, the status quo—unlimited terms—remains in place, and the question of whether Congress should be re‑structured will likely remain a contentious issue in future elections.
