Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz was joined by a handful of GOP colleagues on Monday in reintroducing a constitutional amendment imposing term limits on members of Congress. Cruz tweeted out the text of the resolution filed by himself along with Sens. Mike Braun (Ind.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Rick Scott (Fla.), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Todd Young (Ind.), explaining that “the amendment would limit U.S. senators to two six-year terms and members of the U.S. House of Representatives to three two-year terms.”
Cruz’s office also provided background on the senator’s previous efforts to put term limits in place for federal lawmakers, noting that:
- In 2016, Sen. Cruz and former Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) published an op-ed in the Washington Post announcing their intention to introduce a term limits amendment.
- In 2017, Sen. Cruz first introduced a constitutional amendment mandating term limits in the 115th Congress.
- In 2019, Sen. Cruz led a hearing as chairman of the Senate Judiciary’s Subcommittee on The Constitution, titled, ‘Keeping Congress Accountable: Term Limits in the United States.’ The hearing examined the use of term limits as an avenue to break the cycle of career politicians and encourage accountability in Congress.
- In 2019, Sen. Cruz and former Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.) introduced an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to impose term limits on members of Congress in the 116th Congress.
Also in 2019, the conservative Cruz even gave a nod to far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) when she called for making it illegal for members of Congress to become lobbyists after leaving office.
“Here’s something I don’t say often: on this point, I AGREE with @AOC,” Cruz wrote in reply to one of the congresswoman’s tweets. “Indeed, I have long called for a LIFETIME BAN on former Members of Congress becoming lobbyists. The Swamp would hate it, but perhaps a chance for some bipartisan cooperation?”
Esquire political editor Jack Holmes argued at the time:
If you impose term limits, particularly without a lobbying ban, you’re actually shifting the incentives for congress people in a bad way: since they’re only going to be around for a limited time, they’d better make career plans for afterwards. Like, say, securing a lobbying gig. That’s going to lead to poor performance while they’re in office, particularly for anyone living in their district who can’t afford a big-money campaign donation.