Philip Blumel: Utah court blocks federal candidate age limit from the ballot. Hi, I’m Philip Blumel. Welcome to No Uncertain Terms, the official podcast of the Term Limits movement. This is episode number 242, published on July 15th, 2024.
Stacey Selleck: Your sanctuary from partisan politics.
Philip Blumel: A few weeks ago on the podcast, we were congratulating activist Jared Hendrix and North Dakota voters generally for passing an initiative placing age limits on Congress members elected from that state. We noted, however, that the law was coming under scrutiny because some suggest it runs foul of the controversial 1995 Supreme Court decision, US Term Limits versus Thornton. I suggested it might be possible that the split five to four Thornton decision might be headed back to the Supreme Court for a review. Well, it’s getting more likely that this is true after what happened in Utah last week. Just like in North Dakota, there was an effort in Utah to put a question on the ballot that would impose age limits on federal Congress members. Unlike in North Dakota, this won’t make it to the ballot. In a unanimous decision, the Utah Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that the age limit violated the US Term Limits versus Thornton decision, and the vote was cancelled. Some background, the US Supreme Court ruled in US Term Limits versus Thornton in 1995 that states cannot impose qualifications for prospective members of Congress in addition to those specified in the US Constitution. That case was about term limits, and the Utah Supreme Court says it applies to age limits as well.
Philip Blumel: Justice Clarence Thomas, who is still on the Supreme Court, wrote the brilliant dissent in Thornton that argued that while the Constitution does specify a few minimum qualifications for Congress, there’s no suggestion that this list prohibits other qualifications that the states might provide. He argued that the states have this power under the 10th Amendment. Now, we at US Term Limits would add that term limits are not a qualification, they are a ballot excess requirement, but a digress. The US Term Limits versus Thornton decision invalidated the term limits referenda passed by voters in 23 states in the early 1990s that term-limited their congressional delegations. One notable part of the Utah court decision specifically addresses the possibility that the US Supreme Court revisit the case. The sponsors referred to here are the defenders of the age limit, “On appeal, the sponsors maintain that Thornton should be overruled because its prohibition on state creative qualifications for federal office holders violates the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution. But because the sponsors recognize that this court lacks authority to overturn Thornton, they ask us to affirm the District Court’s decision, therefore, paving the way for them to petition the United States Supreme Court for review.”
Philip Blumel: Oh, boy, it would be mighty interesting to see what today’s court would do with Thornton. Remember, this isn’t the same court as in 1995. Clarence Thomas is still there, but now we also have Justice Neil Gorsuch. And Gorsuch authored a law article back in 1995 or so that defended the constitutionality of the Congressional Term Limits referenda. Well, we at US Term Limits are not banking on a Supreme Court review of Thornton, but we would welcome it. Stay tuned in No Uncertain Terms to follow the story as it continues to unfold.
Speaker 3: This is a public service announcement.
Philip Blumel: On this podcast, we are constantly bashing corrupt politicians trying to stifle the people’s will. So let’s take a moment now to highlight one who is welcoming a citizen-led term limits campaign. This clip is from KSLA News 12 in Bossier City, Louisiana.
Speaker 4: Bossier Mayor, Tommy Chandler, weighs in on a petition regarding term limits. On Monday, the Bossier Term Limits Coalition announced they garnered approximately 3400 petition signatures and submitted them to the Bossier Parish Registrar of Voters. On a statement sent directly to KSLA, the mayor spoke favorably about, and then in part, “The original term limits petition, I fully support this petition and intend to do everything I can to get this initiative on the ballot in December. I have not wavered in my support for term limits, and I am committed to allowing every citizen in Bossier City the chance to vote on this issue. I look forward to doing my part to move term limits from the petition to the ballot,”. And we will continue to track the story and bring you the first alert on air and on our KSLA News 12 app.
Philip Blumel: Okay, great. Now that we got that out the way, let’s bash a corrupt politician. [chuckle] Let me start out by saying that if a politician ever tells you that he or she is endorsed by US Term Limits, don’t believe it. US Term Limits does not endorse candidates. We will educate voters whether a politician signs a term limits pledge, or refuses to sign a term limits pledge, or signs a term limits pledge and then reneges on it. But this is factual information about a single issue and not an endorsement of any politician’s overall program or record. Sometimes a politician will sign a US Term Limits pledge and are pleased with the public responses they get as we alert voters about it. And of course, they are. Voters love term limits. So the politician might exaggerate and refer to our press release as an endorsement. Now, we’ve seen this happen. And we’ll contact the politician and we’ll straighten them out. “We appreciate your signing and living up to your word, but keep in mind, this is not an endorsement.” All right.
Philip Blumel: Now, if a politician named State Senator Justine Wadsack tells you she’s endorsed by US Term Limits, she isn’t exaggerating, she’s not making a mistake, she’s lying. Justine Wadsack is an Arizona State Senator, who, as a candidate, signed the US Term Limits pledge to co-sponsor, vote for, and defend the Term Limits Convention Resolution. This is the state-level resolution calling for a national amendment proposing convention under Article 5 of the US Constitution, limited to the subject of congressional term limits. We inform voters of this fact that she signed it, as this is our job. She liked that. We have a polling from 2022 that shows about 75% of Arizonians support congressional term limits.
Philip Blumel: Once in office, the Term Limits Convention bill came to a vote in the Arizona State Senate. Now, if the Arizona legislature had passed it, it would be the ninth state to have done so. We knew it’d be close, but we thought Arizona could be a winner. After all, so many legislators signed a pledge to support the legislation. It just narrowly lost. Senator Wadsack was part of the reason. She broke her signed pledge and voted no. And then defending herself against a Republican primary challenger, Vince Leach, this year, she claimed that US Term Limits endorsed her. Endorsed her? Wadsack lied to voters when she signed the pledge, she lied to voters claiming she was a term limits supporter endorsed by US Term Limits. Well, we didn’t endorse her, and we are not retracting our endorsement now. We are simply informing the voters of these facts. That is our job. Next.
Philip Blumel: Does youthful energy drive better outcomes? Term limits supporters cite the importance of youthful enthusiasm, broader outside experience, and new ideas that come into office with freshman legislators. Opponents often counter that the loss of specialized experience as veteran legislators leave is too high a price to pay. Well, it’s interesting that such debates often swirl, even among professions where term limits would not be appropriate. Take education, for instance. It sounds plausible that losing a swath of long-time veteran teachers would hurt educational results as younger, less experienced teachers take the helm. But I ran into a study that suggests this is not the case. Cornell’s Maria Fitzpatrick and Michael Lovenheim published a study in 2013 that looks at the results of Illinois schools that offered early retirement incentives in the 1990s. As the number of veterans decreased, the study found that, “The program did not reduce test scores. Likely, it increased them, with positive effects most pronounced in lower schools in terms of socio-economic status.” Among other explanations, the blog Freakonomics suggested one reason for this result that mirrors what we see in legislatures, “Teachers that are near retirement may put forth less effort than younger teachers or maybe less trained in modern pedagogical practices,”. That is, energy and new ideas matter. Who knew?
Stacey Selleck: Like the show? You could help by subscribing and leaving a five-star review on both Apple and Spotify. It’s free.
Philip Blumel: Thanks for joining us for another episode of No Uncertain Terms. The Term Limits Convention bills are moving through the state legislatures. This could be a breakthrough year for the Term Limits movement. To check on the status of the Term Limits Convention Resolution in your state, go to termlimits.com/takeaction. There, you will see if it has been introduced and where it stands in the committee process on its way to the floor vote. If there’s action to take, you’ll see a “Take Action” button by your state. Click it. This will give you the opportunity to send a message to the most relevant legislators urging them to support the legislation. They have to know you are watching. That’s termlimits.com/takeaction. If your state has already passed the Term Limits Convention Resolution or the bill’s not been introduced in your state, you can still help. Please consider making a contribution to US Term Limits. It is our aim to hit the reset button on the US Congress, and you can help. Go to termlimits.com/donate, termlimits.com/donate. Thanks. We’ll be back next week.
Stacey Selleck: Find us on most social media at US Term Limits. Like us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and now LinkedIn.
Speaker 5: USTL.