One thing I never quite understood. Term Limits are unconstitutional for Congress but

[Bandit]

not for the Presidency....:shrug:

[tekisui]

1. The President's term limits come from an Amendment to the Constitution.

If a similar Amendment were passed for Congresspersons, it would be constitutional.

[hobbit709]

3. The irony is that the republicans pushed that because of FDR

and ever since when a republican gets in office they make noises about repealing it.

[Skinner]

2. I don't think all congressional term limits have been found unconstitutional.

The congressional term limits that have been found unconstitutional are those instituted by the states.

Congress has never instituted term limits on its own members, so that has never been tested.

(I think, in fact, if Congress chose to institute term limits on itself it might be constitutional, as the constitution gives congress the power to set their own rules.)

[Bandit]

4. I believe Congress did indeed try to inact Term Limits as part of the Contract with America.

That is when it went to the Extreme Court and the ruling was passed down. Their reasoning was elections were the answer to Term Limits.

[hobbit709]

5. Those were self imposed and when it came time they forgot all about it.

[Skinner]

6. They voted on it but it did not pass.

Congressional term limits did not become law, and were never sent to the Supreme Court.

In fact, the "Contract With America" did not promise term limits. It merely promised a vote on them.

[Codeine]

7. Because we amended the Constitution to enact presidential term limits.

The same could be done for Congress, but amendments are a long, drawn-out process.

[kestrel91316]

8. Constitutional amendments are legally part of the Constitution. So the

amendment passed after FDR to limit presidential terms is in fact part of the Constitution.

There is nothing in place to bar such an amendment regarding our Representatives and/or Senators save the lack of votes.