[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 160 (Tuesday, October 17, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15184-S15185]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              TERM LIMITS

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, the 1994 elections were elections about 
reform. Those of us sent here by the people of America were asked to 
make substantial changes in the way this body conducts business, the 
way in which Government is carried out in this country. The people 
asked us to make significant changes. In return, we made promises which 
resulted in their entrusting to us the sacred opportunity to serve the 
people. The promises we made were important promises. They were 
promises to end politics as usual, to curtail an imperial Congress. 
They were promises to balance the budget. They were promises to change 
the welfare system profoundly.
  Mr. President, I believe they were important promises. I believe they 
were promises upon which the people relied, and have a substantial 
expectation. We have made progress in satisfying those promises in a 
significant way.
  Earlier this year, the American people were optimistic about our 
efforts, about our willingness to change Washington. This fall, though, 
the American people tell a different story. Those who keep their finger 
on the pulse of the American public have indicated a signal from the 
people--a serious discomfort with what is coming. The public's faith in 
their elected officials has again plummeted to an all-time low. Once 
more, Ross Perot, talks about putting an end to the two-party system, 
and once more he is heard.
  What has happened? What is the reason for the new season of 
discontent? I believe it is, in part, because the people have asked us 
to commit to the reforms we promised and they feel that some of their 
agenda is being ignored. One of those agenda items which we have not 
directly addressed, that we have not spoken too clearly on, one that is 
on the minds of the American people indelibly, is the idea and concept 
of term limits. People are familiar with that. Forty Governors have 
term limits. Twenty-three States have, out of their own capacity and 
ability, attempted to impose term limits on the Congress. They see the 
Congress as being a place which bogs down in beltway politics instead 
of reflecting the agenda of America, and does so because of individuals 
who come here and just stay. Certainly, it is an agenda that the people 
expected us to carry forward. Seventy-four percent of the people 
support the concept of term limits. They believe, and I believe, it 
ought to be a part of the agenda of the 104th Congress.
  Leadership is about the messages that we send, the signals we give--
signals not of rhetoric but of action, signals of real reform. Last 
March, our class came to the floor to support a constitutional 
amendment to balance the budget. We spoke of a common commitment to 
change and a new day in the Congress. It mattered very little that we 
fell short of the 67 votes we needed. It was clear what we were doing 
and the depth of our commitment and the sense of our real dedication to 
that objective. I think the people understood there were some who stood 
in the way of that objective. But what truly mattered was the signal we 
sent as a class. It was a signal of promises made and promises kept.
  What matters is that we fought the fight, we kept the faith, we kept 
our promise, and we will keep moving toward that objective. We have 
already moved toward the objective in the budget, and we are moving 
toward the objective in the appropriations, and we will again move 
toward that objective by way of a resolution to have a constitutional 
amendment.
  We must decide what signals we will be sending this fall as the 
American people monitor our performance. It is out of concern for those 
signals that I believe we should vote on a sense-of-the-Senate 
amendment relating to the limitation of terms of Members of Congress. 
We are talking about the number of terms people in the Congress can 
serve.
  This afternoon, barring any legislative maneuvering, we will have a 
vote on that amendment. It will be the first time in 50 years that 
there has been a vote on term limits in the U.S. Senate. I believe it 
will be an important vote, it will be a historic vote. It does not 
carry with it the power of law, so it is not a binding amendment. It 
is, however, an identifying amendment. It is the power of a clear and 
principled statement of the purpose and resolve of 

[[Page S 15185]]
this body to enact term limits, to provide the people of this country 
with an opportunity to change the Constitution of this country, to 
reflect the fact that the biggest perk of all in Washington is the perk 
of incumbency. The playing field is so inordinately tilted toward 
incumbents that individuals from outside have a very difficult time 
challenging.
  I am glad that the majority leader has expressed his commitment to 
voting on this sense-of-the-Senate term-limit amendment. We will send 
an important signal to the American people that we remain serious about 
serious reform, that we have an agenda which is the agenda of the 
American people. We will again say that those of us who were sent here 
in 1994 made promises--promises that we will be keeping.
  The promises we made are not options--they are commitments, they are 
our mandate. We did not cook up the idea of term limits as an election 
gimmick. Term limits are part of the fabric of the political philosophy 
of the same American people who have seen it work for hundreds of years 
at both the State and local level. They have seen it work when 
voluntarily embraced by Presidents from George Washington forward. They 
have enacted it into the Constitution of the United States in the 22d 
amendment. They expect us to make it possible to enact term-limits into 
the Constitution of the United States and provide real reform in the 
U.S. Congress.
  Promises made, promises kept. These promises are not an option, they 
are our mandate.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I am recognized for 15 minutes, I 
understand.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.

                          ____________________