I’ve been digging deeper into non-partisan polling data, trying to take the temperature of where Americans actually stand when you strip away the party labels. And here’s what surprised me: the numbers aren’t the shocking part. We agree on far more than the system wants us to realize. The shocking part is the silence. So many of us are worried about the state of our union. And there are incredible, ordinary Americans standing up and doing their part all over this country. But when it comes to the issues that require a law to be changed — or written in the first place — why aren’t all of us pushing?
Here is a number that should stop you cold:
87% of Americans support congressional term limits.
Not 87% of Republicans. Not 87% of Democrats. 87% of Americans — across every party, every demographic, every region (Pew Research Center, 2023). In a country where we cannot agree on what temperature to set the thermostat, nearly nine out of ten of us agree on this.
And yet it does not exist.
That gap — between what the American people want and what the American government does — is not a glitch. It is the system working exactly as the people in power designed it to work.
The Numbers Nobody Disputes
The data on term limits is remarkable not for what it says but for how little disagreement there is.
According to Pew Research Center’s 2023 survey on proposals to change the political system, 87% of Americans favor term limits for members of Congress. The breakdown by party is almost indistinguishable: 86% of Republicans, 80% of Democrats, and 84% of Independents support the idea (Pew Research Center, 2023). A separate study from the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation found 83% support, with similar bipartisan margins (University of Maryland School of Public Policy, 2023).
For context, these numbers are extraordinary. Getting 87% of Americans to agree on anything is practically a statistical miracle. We do not get 87% agreement on whether the sun is good for you.
Meanwhile, congressional incumbents were reelected at a 98% rate in 2024 — the same rate as 2022 (Ballotpedia, 2025). In 41 states, every single congressional incumbent who ran for reelection won. The reelection rate for House members has not dropped below 85% in over 60 years (OpenSecrets, n.d.).
So 87% of Americans want term limits. And 98% of incumbents keep their seats. One of those numbers explains the other.
The Founders Knew Better
The idea of rotation in office is not some modern invention dreamed up by frustrated voters. It was foundational to the American experiment from the beginning.
The Articles of Confederation — America’s first governing document — explicitly included term limits, stating that “no person shall be capable of being a delegate for more than three years in any term of six years” (Articles of Confederation, 1781, art. V). Before that, several colonies had already experimented with rotation: Connecticut’s Fundamental Orders of 1639 prohibited the governor from serving consecutive terms, and the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776 capped legislative service at four years in seven (Term limits in the United States, n.d.).
When the Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia in 1787, the question was debated extensively. James Madison’s Virginia Plan — the blueprint that framed the entire convention — originally called for legislators “to be incapable of reelection” after their terms expired (National Constitution Center, 2023). The concept was familiar and had broad support.
Thomas Jefferson, who was not present at the convention but corresponded with Madison throughout, warned about what would happen without mandatory rotation. In a letter to Madison, he objected to “the abandonment, in every instance, of the principle of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President” (Jefferson, 1787, letter to James Madison, December 20). George Mason argued that “nothing is so essential to the preservation of a Republican government as a periodic rotation” (as cited in U.S. Term Limits, n.d.). And the historian Mercy Otis Warren warned that without provisions for rotation, “there is no provision… to prevent the perpetuity of office in the same hands for life; which by a little well-timed bribery, will probably be done” (Warren, 1788).
The founders ultimately left term limits out of the Constitution — not because they opposed the idea, but because they believed regular elections and the custom of voluntary rotation would keep incumbency in check (National Constitution Center, 2023). They trusted that representatives would serve and go home.
They were wrong.
What “No Term Limits” Actually Looks Like
The founders could not have imagined what Congress looks like today.
The longest-serving members of the House — Representatives Hal Rogers and Chris Smith — have each held their seats for approximately 44 years, having first taken office in 1981 (Congressional Research Service, 2025). Senator Chuck Grassley, at 92 years old, has served 44 years in the Senate and is the longest-serving Republican in congressional history (FiscalNote, 2025).
These are not anomalies. According to the Congressional Research Service, 33 members have served 40 years or longer in the House of Representatives alone since Congress first convened in 1789 (U.S. House of Representatives, 2026). The average age of the 119th Congress is 58 years old — and 24 members are 80 or older (FiscalNote, 2025; NBC News, 2025).
As Nick Tomboulides, CEO of U.S. Term Limits, put it: “We don’t think senility is really the problem. We think incumbency is the problem, and senility is the symptom. Because when these incumbents can run effectively unopposed or under-opposed for so long, they really have no incentive to leave” (as cited in NBC News, 2025).
The 119th Congress is the third oldest since 1789. This is what happens when a system designed for citizen-legislators becomes a career path.
Why It Doesn’t Change
If 87% of Americans want term limits, why don’t we have them?
Because the only people with the power to impose term limits on Congress are Congress. And Congress has no interest in firing itself.
The Supreme Court closed the other obvious path in 1995. In U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, the court ruled 5–4 that individual states cannot impose term limits on their own federal representatives (U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 1995). Twenty-three states had already passed term limit laws. The court struck them all down.
That leaves one remaining constitutional path — and it is the one the founders built specifically for moments like this.
Article V of the Constitution provides two ways to amend the nation’s highest law. The first is the familiar route: Congress proposes an amendment by a two-thirds vote in both chambers. Every amendment in American history has come through this path. But the founders knew that Congress might one day refuse to act against its own interests, so they built a second path: if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) pass resolutions calling for a convention to propose amendments, Congress is compelled by law to call that convention. Any amendment proposed by the convention must then be ratified by three-fourths of the states (38) before it becomes law.
This process — formally called a “convention for proposing amendments” and commonly known as an Article V Convention or a Convention of States — has never been used. But it has come close enough to force Congress’s hand before. In 1912, more than 25 states passed applications calling for a convention on the direct election of senators. Congress, facing the real possibility of a convention it could not control, acted first — proposing what became the 17th Amendment on its own (National Constitution Center, 2023).
Today, two major efforts are driving the Article V path toward term limits. U.S. Term Limits (USTL) promotes a single-subject application focused exclusively on congressional term limits. As of early 2026, 12 state legislatures have passed the USTL resolution (U.S. Term Limits, 2025). Separately, Convention of States Action (COSA) promotes a broader application that includes term limits alongside fiscal restraints and limits on federal power. Twenty states have passed the COSA resolution (Convention of States Action, 2026). While the two efforts differ in scope, both require 34 states to trigger a convention — and both are actively advancing in state legislatures across the country.
This is not theoretical. This is happening. It is happening slowly — because entrenched power does not surrender easily — but it is happening.
This Is the Test Case
Term limits matter to Actually Govern not because we have a position on the ideal number of terms — reasonable people can disagree about that. Term limits matter because they are the single clearest proof that the system serves itself.
When 87% of the country agrees on something and the government refuses to act, that is not a policy disagreement. That is a power structure protecting itself at the direct expense of the people it claims to represent.
This is not a left issue or a right issue. This is a math issue. 87% is not a majority. It is not a mandate. It is a near-unanimous demand from the American people — and it has been ignored for decades.
The founders trusted elections to enforce rotation. Elections failed. The states tried to impose limits. The Supreme Court stopped them. The only path left is the one the founders built as a last resort — and it requires the American people to demand it, state by state, until the number hits 34.
That is what civic engagement looks like. Not yelling at your neighbor about which party is worse. Not sharing outrage on social media. Calling your state legislator. Showing up at a statehouse hearing. Making the system respond to the 87% — not the 535.
The Bottom Line
The founders debated term limits before the Constitution was even written. They included them in the Articles of Confederation. Jefferson warned against abandoning them. Mason called rotation essential to preserving the republic. Warren predicted that without them, bribery would keep the same people in office for life.
Every single one of those warnings came true.
87% of Americans know it. The question is whether 87% of Americans will do anything about it.
The system will not fix itself. That is the one thing history has proven beyond any doubt.
References
Articles of Confederation, art. V (1781). National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/articles-of-confederation
Ballotpedia. (2025). Election results, 2024: Incumbent win rates by state. https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2024:_Incumbent_win_rates_by_state
Congressional Research Service. (2025). Congressional careers: Service tenure and patterns of member service, 1789–2025 (Report No. R41545). Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R41545
Convention of States Action. (2026). Progress: States that have passed the Convention of States Article V application. https://conventionofstates.com/states-that-have-passed-the-convention-of-states-article-v-application
FiscalNote. (2025, November 22). Age of members of 119th Congress (& averages). https://fiscalnote.com/blog/how-old-is-the-119th-congress
Jefferson, T. (1787). Letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787. In J. P. Boyd (Ed.), The papers of Thomas Jefferson (Vol. 12). Princeton University Press.
National Constitution Center. (2023, October 27). Why term limits for Congress face a challenging constitutional path. https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/why-term-limits-for-congress-face-a-challenging-constitutional-path
NBC News. (2025, January). 24 members of Congress are 80 or older. More than half are running for re-election. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/congress-oldest-members-run-reelection-80s-rcna249479
OpenSecrets. (n.d.). Reelection rates over the years. https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/reelection-rates
Pew Research Center. (2023, September 19). How Americans view proposals to change the political system. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/09/19/how-americans-view-proposals-to-change-the-political-system/
University of Maryland School of Public Policy. (2023). Survey on congressional term limits [Report]. Program for Public Consultation.
U.S. House of Representatives. (2026, January 3). Members who have served 40 years or longer in the House. Office of the Historian. https://history.house.gov/Institution/Seniority/40-Years/
U.S. Term Limits. (2025). Term limits convention progress. https://termlimits.com/progress/
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995).
Warren, M. O. (1788). Observations on the new Constitution, and on the Federal and State Conventions. Reprinted in H. J. Storing (Ed.), The Complete Anti-Federalist (Vol. 4). University of Chicago Press, 1981.
Actually Govern is a project of Whimsy Books LLC d/b/a Actually Govern. We are non-partisan, unaffiliated with any political party, and committed to civic education over political tribalism.
