TERM LIMITS: IT'S TIME FOR SERIOUS DISCUSSION

Limiting the number of terms a U.S. senator or member of Congress can serve is getting a good deal of attention from two fronts. The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on whether a state can impose limits. And the new Republican leadership of the House of Representatives have promised a vote on the issue within the first 100 days after Congress convenes in January.

Already, 22 states have set some sort of limits on how long senators and representatives can serve in Congress.

Missouri has taken a half-step toward limits, which would only take effect when half of all 50 states do likewise. The Missouri limits would be 12 years (two terms) for senators and eight years (four terms) for representatives.

If the Supreme Court decides it is unconstitutional for states to in effect establish the qualifications of a candidate for Congress, each of the 22 states that have imposed limits will have to review their plans and perhaps abandon limits altogether.

At the same time, there is no standardization of term limits among the state that have imposed them. Some have limits longer or shorter than the Missouri limits.

One way to solve the constitutional question and standardize the limits would be a constitutional amendment, which is what the new GOP leadership proposes to bring to a House vote sometime early next year. It makes more sense to have equal limits for both senators and representatives of 12 years each.

Some voters may think the recent general election that gave Republicans a congressional majority for the first time in 40 years has put an end to the need for limits. But the patronage and pork-barrel decision making swayed by special-interest groups is likely to continue unabated, unless the incentive is removed. And that incentive is longevity in Congress.

It is reasonable to think that federal legislators limited to 12 years in office will be less focused on gaining power and financial support for re-election campaigns. They should be more focused on sound legislation and policy.

As U.S. Sen.-elect John Ashcroft said this week, now is the time to push for the term-limit amendment. He is right when he says there is no need to wait on a Supreme Court decision on what states have done in that area. A constitutional amendment will apply to all the states, regardless of which way the High Court rules.