1). The delegates who met in Philadelphia to write the Constitution were not in favor of limiting Congressional terms. James Madison stated, "Better to have veteran lawmakers who will be thoroughly masters of the public business than to require a steady procession of fresh faces," (Savage 1995, p.1). The framers hoped that by creating minimal qualifications, this would allow the people to replace their lawmakers is desired.

             James Madison advocated minimal requirements for eligibility was his commitment to democracy (Greenburg 1995, p.A18). He reasoned that if a representative failed to uphold their promises and duties, that they would not be re-elected. "Frequent elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured." (Greenburg 1995, p.A18). This makes perfect sense to me. If a member of Congress is doing a good job representing his people, then why should he or she be limited in his/her terms? If he/she is doing a bad job, don"t re-elect him/her.

             "We believe we have term limits, and they are called elections," said Becky Cain, president of the League of Woman"s Voters (Varner 1996 p.4A). Cain feels strongly that notes on the opinions of Congressman should not be included on ballots. The notes on the ballots of how people voted on the amendment to term limits has been referred to as "the Scarlet Letter" indicating that these people would know how everyone voted. I don"t think this should be included on the ballots. Those who really want to know how their Congressmen and women voted can find out very easily. When a notation is made on a ballot, it does not indicate their reasoning of why they voted how they did. I think that the reasoning that those who oppose limiting the terms is very valid. If voters knew this reasoning maybe they would oppose the limits too.

             The Democrats have generally opposed limiting Congressional terms as well.