ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, February 13, 1997 TAG: 9702130062
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
SOURCE: Newsday
Lawmakers Wednesday proved that term limits may be popular at home but poison on Capitol Hill.
For the second straight session, the House Wednesday failed to garner a two-thirds majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment to limit lawmakers' length of service here to 12 years - six terms for House members and two terms for senators.
The rejection by a 217-211 vote was part of a lengthy day in which House members debated and voted down 10 versions of the proposal, a move some lawmakers say was designed to let them return to their districts and proclaim that they voted for term limits.
Both Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Roanoke, and Rep. Virgil Goode, D-Rocky Mount, voted in favor of the amendment; Rep Rick Boucher, D-Abingdon, voted against it.
``This was one way for Republicans to cover their ... '' said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who opposes term limits. ``All these guys ran for office trying to out-term-limit each other. The (Republican) leadership had to come up with so many amendments to cover everyone. The whole thing is a hoax.''
Many Republican House candidates in 1994 said they supported term limits, which was part of the GOP's ``Contract With America.''
But the Republican-controlled House two years ago rejected term limits by a 227-206 vote, 63 votes short of the required two-thirds majority. The Senate tried to pass a term-limits bill last April but fell two votes short of approval.
House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., promised term-limits supporters last year that they would get another crack at it again in 1997. But Wednesday's action mirrored 1995.
Democrats and senior Republicans argued that imposing term limits would destroy the institutional memory of Congress and give more power to unelected congressional staffers who could remain in their jobs long after a lawmaker is gone.
``To adopt term limits is to play Russian roulette with the future,'' said Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., a 12-term veteran who chairs the House Judiciary Committee. ``This is no place for amateurs.'' Of the 435 members, 105 have been in the House more than 12 years.
Term-limit supporters said change is needed to level the ground between incumbent and challenger, to guarantee that Congress is infused with new blood and ideas, and to ensure that the needs of constituents are met.
``This is absolutely the right way to go,'' said Rep. Frank LoBiondo, a second-term Republican from New Jersey. ``It will help maintain ... (Congress') energy level, to give 150 percent, which is questionable after 25 years. We need to make sure that the members stay rooted in what their constituencies care about. I think term limits will do that.''
But term-limits supporters like LoBiondo were splintered by the 10 versions, which included making term limits retroactive, a proposal to restrict House members to eight years in office and Senate members to 12, and a measure that would give the states the rights to set term limits on their members of Congress.
House Republican leaders said they allowed so many amendments to protect 19 GOP members from so-called ``scarlet letter'' legislation passed by nine states last November.
If a member from those states - Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada and South Dakota - does not vote for a specific term-limit measure that state favors, a tag that says ``Violated Voter Instruction on Term Limits'' would be placed next to his or her name when it appears on the ballot next election.
``This is ridiculous,'' said Paul Jacob, executive director of U.S. Term Limits, a conservative group that helped the states craft the initiatives. ``There is no need for this many amendments. Members from these states have been given false guidance if they think they must vote for their law only to avoid the ballot notation.''
LENGTH: Medium: 76 linesby CNB