Terrell Williams is the Delaware co-chair of U.S. Term Limits.
Every election cycle produces winners and losers. Candidates celebrate victories, political parties claim mandates, and pundits debate what the results mean for the future. Yet, this year, one winner has already emerged well before the final ballots are cast: the growing movement for congressional term limits.
Across the nation, a record number of candidates — Republicans, Democrats and independents alike — are signing the U.S. Term Limits pledge promising to support congressional term limits if elected. That surge reflects something far larger than campaign strategy. It reflects the will of the American people.
Congressional term limits remain one of the few issues that consistently earns overwhelming support across party lines. Americans may disagree on taxes, spending, immigration and countless other issues, but they largely agree that no one should be able to build a lifetime career in Congress.
Voters are sending a clear message. They want citizen legislators, not career politicians. They want fresh ideas, new leaders and greater accountability. Candidates understand that reality, even if many in Washington continue to ignore it.
Predictably, opponents of congressional term limits continue to offer the same argument: Congress will never vote to limit its own power.
History tells us they are wrong.
The Constitution gives Congress two paths for proposing amendments. Congress can propose an amendment itself with a two-thirds vote, or two-thirds of the states can force the issue by calling for an Article 5 convention. Throughout American history, Congress has repeatedly chosen to act before the states reached that threshold — not because Congress suddenly embraced reform but because lawmakers recognized that the states were building enough momentum to act without them.
The 17th Amendment, providing for the direct election of U.S. senators, is perhaps the clearest example. As more state legislatures moved toward an Article 5 convention, Congress realized it was on the verge of losing control of the amendment authorship. Rather than allow the states to do it, Congress proposed the amendment itself.
The same pattern emerged with the repeal of Prohibition. As pressure mounted across the country, Congress proposed the 21st Amendment, repealing Prohibition before an Article 5 convention became a reality.
Following Franklin Roosevelt’s unprecedented four elections, Congress again responded to overwhelming public sentiment by proposing the 22nd Amendment, limiting presidents to two elected terms.
The principle extends beyond constitutional amendments. During the 1930s, growing public support for Sen. Huey Long’s sweeping “every man a king” program fueled calls for dramatic constitutional changes. Rather than risk a broader constitutional movement gaining momentum in the states, Congress enacted significant reforms that addressed many concerns driving those state efforts.
The lesson is unmistakable. Congress does not act in a vacuum. It acts when enough states create political pressure that makes inaction more dangerous than reform.
That is exactly where the congressional term limits movement stands today.
The record number of candidates signing the congressional term limits pledge demonstrates that politicians are increasingly recognizing what voters have believed for decades. Public support for term limits is not fading; it is growing stronger.
Now the responsibility shifts to the states.
Delaware has an opportunity to help lead the next chapter of this movement by passing the U.S. Term Limits resolution for congressional term limits. This would add Delaware’s voice to a growing chorus of states demanding that Washington address one of the most popular reforms in America.
Every state that passes this resolution increases the pressure on Congress. Every additional state brings the nation one step closer to the point where Congress must decide whether it wants to propose a congressional term limits amendment itself or allow the states to decide their term limits for them. That is exactly how many of our nation’s most important constitutional reforms have advanced. Congress has repeatedly chosen to act once it became clear that the states were prepared to do so instead.
The question, therefore, is not whether Congress is willing to limit itself voluntarily. The real question is whether enough states are willing to make Congress believe it has no other choice.
The record number of candidates embracing congressional term limits this election season proves that the political winds are shifting. The momentum is real, the public support is undeniable, and the opportunity has never been greater.
Delaware has always been known as the First State. Once again, it has the opportunity to lead.
By passing the U.S. Term Limits resolution for congressional term limits, Delaware can create the very pressure that has driven some of the most significant constitutional reforms in American history. If enough states act, history suggests that Congress will do what it has done before: Respond to the will of the American people before the states force its hand.
The biggest winner of this election cycle is not a political party or a particular candidate. It is the growing movement for congressional term limits. Now, Delaware has the chance to help turn that momentum into constitutional reform.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
