Texas House Bill HCR97

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Refer: 3/18/11

Caption

Memorializing the U.S. Congress to propose and submit to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment requiring term limits for members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Impact

If enacted, HCR97 would support the idea of imposing limits of four two-year terms on Representatives. This move seeks to promote competitive elections, reduce the influence of career politicians, and reinvigorate the concept of citizen legislators. Proponents argue that term limits will facilitate the entry of new ideas and perspectives into Congress, potentially leading to more responsive governance. Additionally, it seeks to balance the power dynamics between the executive and legislative branches of the federal government, drawing parallels to previous successes like the two-term limit for the presidency enacted in 1951.

Summary

HCR97 is a concurrent resolution from the Texas Legislature aimed at urging the U.S. Congress to propose a constitutional amendment establishing term limits for members of the House of Representatives. The resolution reflects the historical advocacy for term limits by notable founding figures such as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, who recognized the need for a strong connection between government officials and the electorate they serve. The bill underscores the public's growing dissatisfaction with the incumbency rate in Congress, noting that it hovers around 96%, which many perceive as detrimental to democracy.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HCR97 is largely supportive among those advocating for major political reforms. Polls indicate a significant portion of the public, around 80%, favors implementing term limits for their legislative representatives. However, opponents of the bill may argue that term limits could lead to a loss of experienced lawmakers and hinder long-term legislative decision-making. This belief reflects a fundamental divide in how different stakeholders perceive the implications of term limits on the efficacy of governance.

Contention

The main contention within discussions around HCR97 revolves around the potential consequences of imposing term limits. Advocates stress that such limits would enhance accountability and prevent entrenched interests from monopolizing power in Congress. Critics, however, caution that the quick rotation of elected officials might reduce the overall effectiveness of legislative work and impede the development of long-term policies critical to national interests. Thus, the debate highlights significant philosophical differences regarding the balance between democratic ideals of representation and the practical intricacies of legislative governance.