[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 29, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H3969]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                TERM LIMITS AMENDMENT SHOULD HAVE PASSED

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Kim] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KIM. Madam Speaker, I was very disappointed today that we were 
not able to pass the resolution to limit our own congressional terms. I 
was very disappointed. I think it is a sad day for us. Shame on us. I 
cannot understand it, because more than two dozen states sent a strong 
message to us that they want some kind of term limits. The people are 
tired of all these professional politicians entrenched in Washington, 
D.C. They want some circulation. Yet we ignore them, because we are so 
arrogant that we know the best. Today, again, we ignored those people's 
wishes.
  I was listening carefully why some Members are opposed to term 
limits. Let me tell you how ridiculous it is, the arguments I heard 
today. The first argument is experience. We need the experience here. 
What kind of experience do we need, experience how to play politics? 
Experience how to present speech, feel good speech? Experience how to 
understand the parliamentary procedure? Is that experience we need?
  All this Washington, D.C. experience we do not need. All we need is 
experience, fresh experience from the outside, the real world. What is 
happening there us people are suffering every day. Small business is 
suffering, trying to maintain their business, trying to meet the 
payroll. That kind of experience we need, not inside-the-beltway 
experience. It is a ridiculous comparison.
  Also one Member from the other side of the aisle mentioned Gen. Colin 
Powell's statement that it took him 30 years to learn the job, implying 
that it will take us 30 years to learn this job. That is a ridiculous 
comparison.

                              {time}  2200

  I think it is a sad day that Members using that kind of comparison 
try to justify why term limits should not be implemented. The second 
argument I am hearing is that people should decide, not us. Especially 
from the gentlewoman from California, I was surprised. Only 30 years 
ago the California voters voted overwhelmingly to supporting term 
limits. How quickly we forgot. That is another reason why we have got 
to have some rotation here. How arrogant it is. Only 30 years ago the 
California people overwhelmingly passed this term limit, yet we forgot. 
Say they, people should decide. They did, they spoke already.
  The other one I am hearing is this nonsense that we are going to give 
more power to nonelected staff members. Come on. Our staff members, 
until we passed the bill not too long ago, they do not have very much 
power. They can be fired, they can be dismissed any time. Laws do not 
apply to them even. Look at California, we have term limits out there 
and state assemblies, the state Senate, the staff does not bother us. 
They do not take over any powers. They are running fine in Sacramento. 
That is another stupid argument that I cannot understand.
  Finally, this retroactive. I voted yes on that, 12 years retroactive. 
What is wrong with it? Is not 12 years long enough?
  The argument is we need an orderly transfer, otherwise we are going 
to have a chaotic situation, that so many Members will resign. That is 
nonsense. The last 2 years ago, when I came to Congress, we had 110 
freshmen. This year something like 87. Added together, more than 200 
changes in the last 3 years. I do not see any chaos. It was very, a 
very orderly transfer. As a matter of fact, we made so much change, so 
much dynamic changes the last two years, I think it is good that we 
should have such a dramatic change.
  Look at California. I do not see any disorderly chaotic situation out 
there serving only 2 years, only 6 years and give up the seat.
  Also they say that they are against it because Democrats are playing 
games. They do not want to have a term limit. They are playing games. 
They are using this as an excuse to play games. I do not understand 
that. I do not know what kind of playing games they are doing. If it is 
true, then shame on them. But that is another reason why we have to get 
rid of those folks who know how to play games. They have been here too 
long. That is why they are playing games. I do not know how to play 
games. Maybe I should be here 10 years, and then I know how to play 
games. This bunch of rhetoric that I cannot understand coming from the 
private sector, it is totally beyond my comprehension why we are 
rejecting our own term limits.
  I think it is really a sad day.

                          ____________________