Congressional Quarterly used to be known by those who covered Congress as the “Bible of all things related to Capitol Hill.”

Its reporting was so solid it did not require reporters to attribute facts found in CQ to the publication. It once reported that that issue of term limits was in reality a non-starter because the average length of terms for senators and House members didn’t merit much debate.

I saw a survey recently from CQ that put the average term length for House members at less than nine years; senators serve for a little more than 11 years on average.

I want to post this info as my statement that congressional term limits is a non-starter, in my view. We have term limits already. They are contained in the congressional elections we have every two years. The founders established elections every two years for House members. Senators serve for six years and one-third of the Senate is voted on every two years. The founders didn’t set term limits for the president, but they came after the death of President Franklin Roosevelt, who succumbed in April 1945 after beginning his fourth term in the White House.

I get that some of the longer-serving members now make for vigorous debate fodder. They are few in number.

Let us look, therefore, at the larger view of Congress. It’s not a cesspool of individuals clinging to public office. Most of them serve their time and and then leave to do something else.