MTM - Interview with Joe Wolverton..What's Wrong with Term Limits

Tired of hearing that term limits will fix Washington? We take a hard look at the logic behind capping years in office and explain why the move can backfire. With constitutional law scholar Joe Wolverton, we trace the real source of entrenched power to voter incentives, not a missing clause, and explore how frequent elections already function as the framers’ built-in check. Along the way, we unpack the risks of a Convention of States, from illusory promises to the danger of rewriting more than anyone bargained for.

Hamilton’s Federalist No. 72 takes center stage as we examine how forced exits can drain motivation for good governance, creating lame ducks who feel less accountable to the people they serve. We walk through real-world incentives: incumbents enjoy free media and district benefits, challengers must buy attention, and constituents often reward short-term spoils over long-term restraint. Swap names under a term cap and the same priorities often persist, just with fresher faces and shorter horizons.

This conversation leans into first principles. A republic relies on voter choice; removing candidates by law narrows that choice and can sideline rare voices who fight surveillance creep, endless war, or runaway spending. Structural tweaks cannot replace the work of civic renewal. If we change what we demand from representatives, ballots become the most powerful term limit on offer.

We close with a teaser for next week’s topic: the authority of states to push back on federal overreach. Want a head start? Head to jbs.org/states for videos, tools, and background on federalism and state power. If this perspective challenged you, share it with a friend, subscribe for the follow-up on nullification, and leave a review to tell us where you stand.

Transcript

Welcome And Guest Credentials

SPEAKER_00 0:11

Hosted by author and physician, Dr. Robert Jackson, and his wife Carlotta and Daughter Annabella. So listen up because the doctor is dead.

SPEAKER_01 0:22

Welcome to More Than Medicine. I'm your host, Dr. Robert Jackson, bringing to you biblical insights and stories from the Country Doctor's Rusty Dusty Scrapbook. Well, again this week I'm honored to have Joe Wolverton with me, and we're continuing our conversation about the Constitutional Convention, why that's not a great idea at all. Last week we talked about the balanced budget and why we don't have a balanced budget and why a constitutional convention is never going to give us a balanced budget. And I've asked Joe to come back one more time this week and talk to us about term limits and why term limits is not a constitutional idea and not a good idea at all. Now, Joe, if you don't mind, identify yourself again, like you've done at the beginning of each podcast, so that my folks will understand what your authority is as a constitutional lawyer. So if you don't mind, let's start off with that.

Framing The Term Limits Debate

SPEAKER_02 1:29

Well, that's interesting. I was just reading this morning in the Bible when Jesus talks about the importance of authority. So here you are asking my the authority with which I speak. So it's interesting the way those things work out. I read about it this morning and talk about it this evening. So uh basically been working for the John Byrd Society as an independent contractor and providing lots of information on the Constitution, content on the Constitution. And well, finally they just they created a job for me, the Constitutional Law Scholar, which basically means that anything the John Byrd Society produces that touches and concerns the Constitution, that that thing will have to be approved by me before it's made public. That we want to be consistent uh in our messaging with regard to the Constitution and its interpretation for today's world. And so they, in respect to the work I've done in the past over the past, I guess, 30 years, they uh I've been working for them for 15 uh or more, and oh gosh, 20 or more now, and they recognized that and honored me with that uh title of their constitutional law scholar. So I get invited to be on podcasts and different webinars and different uh forums and events to speak on issues of constitutionality and how the how the John Burke Society believes that those issues are covered by the Constitution and how they apply to us today. And that's what I do, and that's what I'm doing with you.

SPEAKER_01 2:56

When my patients tell me that somebody created a job for them, usually that means somebody felt sorry for them and that they couldn't get a job.

SPEAKER_02 3:04

That could be true. Now, I'm not gonna deny that that's true. They could have seen me in there and been like, Man, we've had this boy in here for so long, might as well throw a bone at him.

SPEAKER_01 3:12

I hear you, I hear you.

SPEAKER_02 3:14

That could have been it. But I'm grateful for the bone they threw at me, I can tell you that.

Why A Convention Of States Falls Short

SPEAKER_01 3:17

All right. Well, let's let's talk about term limits now. And and let me let me put it to you this way. Every time we talk about a constitutional convention, and I begin to say to people, I don't think that's a great idea, and I don't think it's constitutional, and they begin to say, Well, what about term limits? Don't you think that we need to have a constitutional convention so that we can authorize term limits? What do you say to that?

“We Already Have Term Limits”

SPEAKER_02 3:44

Well, first of all, I say, ask that person, do you really think that's what's going to happen? If it were such a good idea, and so many people believed in it as COS claims, that's Convention of States, they're the they're the primary engine moving this thing along toward it trying to get a constitutional convention called they're the Convention of States or COS. They're the they're the main drive behind this, they're the the deep pockets, the the billionaire oil money that's behind all this. And they, if it were, they've been doing this for over 20 years. And if this were such a good idea, wouldn't it have happened? First of all. Second of all, do you really think that we're gonna get people in that convention who are able to tinker all they want with the Constitution and that they're gonna actually sit there and abide by abide by rules? Does Congress abide by the rules now? No, nope, nope. Does the executive abide by the rules? Does the Supreme Court no? No. Why all of a sudden are we gonna expect people who don't abide by the rules now to abide by the rules then? They won't. And we won't get term limits. And for and the second thing I would say to them is we don't need them, Doc. We do not need term limits because guess what? We already have them. We have term limits in the Constitution, right? If you're a senator, you serve for six years. If you're a congressman, you serve uh you know, House of Representatives, you serve for two years. If you're a president, you serve for four years. Those are term limits, those are called term limits, and we have them. So guess what? The reason we have the return of so many corrupt politicians is not the fault of the corrupt politicians, it's our fault. We're the reason. We're calling for term limits to do what? To do something for us that we should be able to do for ourselves. It's just another, to me, it's another growth of the of the nanny state. We just want the nanny state to do for us what we can refuse to do for ourselves, which is to reject corrupt politicians and get rid of them. But guess what, doc? We're not gonna do that because in our heart we do not desire that. We enjoy the spoils of corrupt politicians. Yep, I agree. We want them to say, if you put in term limits, guess what? Guess who's gonna represent Nancy Pelosi's district next time? Another Nancy Pelosi. If you put in term limits, all of a sudden all these people have been waiting on her to retire or die or whatever, they're gonna step in. And it's because of the the constituency. It's not because of the constitution. The constitution can turn contains term limits. Read it. There are term limits in the constitution. It's the constituency that is failing us, not the constitution. And I want to read this to you, to your readers. I know they'll appreciate this because of who they are, who you are. This is because the COS, man, they love to hide behind the skirts of the Founding Fathers. They love it so much, and they misquote them and they quote them out of context. But I'm gonna quote to you, Alexander Hamilton, speaking on the very subject of an amendment to limit terms. Now, listen, this is from Federalist number 72. Now it may be a little hard to understand, but listen to it, pay attention. He says, nothing appears more plausible at first sight, but more ill-founded upon close inspection than a scheme that in relation to the present point term limits has some respectable advocates. I mean that of that of continuing the chief magistrate in office for a certain time and then excluding him from it for either a limited period or forever thereafter. The exclusion, whether temporary or perpetual, would have nearly the same effects, and those effects, for the most part, would be pernicious and not salutary. And then he goes on to say, one of the ill effects of the exclusion, so he's talking about term limits, one of the ill effects would be a dim a diminution of the inducements to good behavior. There are few men who would not feel less zeal in the discharge of a duty when they were conscious that the advantages of the station to which it was connected must be relinquished at a determinate period than when they were permitted to obtain a hope of obtaining by merit a continuance of that position. Now that's Alexander Hamilton's saying. Yeah. So he says nothing appears to be a better idea than term limits. However, it is not a good idea because it would be day the the effects of it would be more dangerous than than uh help helpful. He says one of the effects, one of the most prominent effects of a term limits bill would be a what we would call a uh lame duck Congress.

SPEAKER_01 9:10

Yep, exactly.

Constituents, Not The Constitution

SPEAKER_02 9:11

They would Alexander Hamilton said that they would be, how do you how did he say it? That they would not feel as much zeal in the discharge of their duty if they knew that the advantages of their office were about to end. That if you've got no fear or hope of being re-elected, then you're not gonna care what you do. They we would say they would be less responsive to the people. Yep, they will be a largely lame duck. And they don't, and come on, let's just talk honestly. Uh a term limits doesn't change anything. It doesn't change anything. A term limits bill, it's not gonna change us, and we're the reason these people keep getting elected. It's most baffling to those of us who study history and study the the gospel at the same time. It's baffling to think how we think that somehow putting an extra line in the Constitution is gonna change us into people who vote for virtuous politicians. How is that gonna happen? That's only gonna happen if we decide to change what we want out of government. And if we want goods and services and money and construction jobs and all this, and food stamps and public education, if we want all these things from government, then no term limit bill will ever make any difference because we're going to keep electing the same old, same old. Yep, that's right. And that's just that no COS person can argue against that. Yep, the founders they envision that two things would be a check on the federal government. Number one, the state legislators through the Senate, the state legislators control the Senate. Well, that's all gone. But number two, frequent elections. Right? Frequent elections. That is term limits. At the Constitutional Convention, you had someone like Governor Morris, who said that term limits would have nothing but a negative impact on motivation for good government. You're not gonna want to do something. If you know, I mean, think about it. If a criminal breaks in a house and the alarm starts going off and he knows he's got five minutes before the cops get there, why he's gonna go get busy getting everything he can and getting out before that alarm, before those five minutes are over. Well, that's the way these politicians would be. If I say to you, you can't be re-elected and you only have this two years or this six years or this four years to do whatever you want to do, why you're gonna be like that prisoner you're gonna throw everything into the bag just hoping you get some, you know, get something in value. That that criminal. And that's what it's gonna create, essentially a criminal class of congressmen. Yep. Because they're like Alexander Hamilton said, they don't care. They don't care. You the the idea that they can't be rewarded by re-election induces even the most uh honest men to be corrupt. If I cannot be re-elected on my merit as a congressman, why would I be a good congressman?

SPEAKER_01 12:35

That's right. It tends it tends to make men do everything they can for their friends or family while they're in office that lasts four years, two years, six years, whatever however long it is. Uh that's right. They have they have authority and power to do things for their friends or family, um, and then they're out and they can't come back in, and they don't care what anybody thinks about it, and they take advantage of that position and that influence for that last couple of years until they're outed by term limits.

SPEAKER_02 13:11

Right. And even, you know, you take, like I said, take the most honest man. He knows, take, you know, I in my opinion, the most honest congressman is Thomas Massey.

SPEAKER_01 13:20

Mm-hmm.

SPEAKER_02 13:21

You take Thomas Massey and tell him, Well, you're not gonna be able to be re-elected, even he will say, Well, there's no way I get done what I need to get done in two years about returning this country to its constitutional uh anchor. There's no way to do that in two years. So I might as well not worry about it. Um and either he doesn't run or he doesn't get anything accomplished because he recognizes that two years in Washington is like two minutes underwater.

SPEAKER_01 13:50

That's right.

Hamilton’s Case Against Term Limits

SPEAKER_02 13:52

You know, and so he doesn't bother. And this this makes it where good men either don't run or they don't they don't get anything accomplished because they know they're not going to be rewarded for their faithfulness. Yep, yep. And it's like Hamilton said at the end of that paragraph, he said, the most that could be expected from most men in such a situation is not doing harm rather than the positive merit of doing good. The most we we can hope for by term limits is well, we hope this congressman doesn't do any harm in two years. Yeah, because that's what's gonna happen, because good men, like I said, will recognize that their time, even if they're the best, most constitutionally minded congressman, is going to be cut short and they will not be rewarded for their faithfulness. If there's no incentive to be constitutionally minded, if you remove that incentive right of reward, if you remove the incentive of incumbency, you remove from most people the desire to do as much good as they could have. That's just a fact of life, Doc. That's do you if you told you were gonna be hired for a week at this job, if you need, you know, think about temp jobs. I don't know if you ever had a temp job, but there was a time in my life where I had to do some temp jobs. And if I was hired at this temp place for two weeks, guess how much effort I put in? None.

SPEAKER_01 15:25

That's right.

SPEAKER_02 15:26

Because I knew at the end of two two weeks I was gonna be working somewhere else.

SPEAKER_01 15:29

Yeah. That's right.

SPEAKER_02 15:30

And so we're turning Congress and the courts and the president into temp jobs.

SPEAKER_01 15:36

Yep.

SPEAKER_02 15:36

Where everyone's just biding their time doing whatever until the term of office, term of office, until the the two weeks, whatever, until the time is up. You're turning top you're turning the government into a bunch of TIMP workers.

SPEAKER_01 15:52

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 15:53

And everybody who's ever been a temp worker or hired a TIMP worker knows how those people when I was a lawyer, I had a temp, I hired a TIMP worker to be a uh secretary for me. And boy, I got nothing out of that dude. Nothing. Because he knew that in a couple weeks he was gone. And that's true.

SPEAKER_01 16:10

Yeah.

Lame Duck Incentives And Abuse

SPEAKER_02 16:11

Right? I only needed to bridge a gap. And he knew that. So that will be what we get. If you, if these people insist, if they pour enough money into convincing enough state legislators to call a convention, which I'm convinced they won't, because they haven't done it in 25 years with the amount of money they poured into it, it ain't gonna happen, right? It's not gonna happen. And I'm grateful to God for that because that would be we would come out with a constitution that neither you nor I would recognize, and neither you nor I nor any of your listeners would want to live under. Let me tell you that, and I'll I'll say this because I think it's so important. COS offers a bunch of promises that they know they will never have to fulfill. Right? Because they won't be able to. It's like when any politician makes a promise on the campaign trail, they know that they'll never have to fulfill that promise. Why? Because maybe they don't get elected, and you don't have to worry about it then. But if they do get elected, then they can say, man, up here it's just gridlock on Capitol Hill. I can't get anything done up here. The the Democrats they won't let anything happen. The Republicans, they they obstruct everything that's done. I can't get it done. And so then you have an excuse for not fulfilling your promises. Well, that's COS. Right now, they're just illusory, what we call in the law, illusory promises. Promises you never have to worry about fulfilling, right? And if this convention were to happen, well, then they'll have a million excuses of why it didn't happen the way they wanted it to. Well, well, this this legislator went off the rails, or man, they changed the rules at the last minute, and it won't matter. So when they go to these conventions, when they go to these forums, when they go to these uh you know meetings trying to convince people to sign on with COS, they know that they're making promises they'll never have to fulfill. And that's a really powerful thing. Because what can you do? It's like we talked about last time. You can tell people anything and everything they want to hear. If you know that you'll never have to do anything about these promises, there's nothing that you won't promise. Yeah. I promise every man a 40 acres and a mule, right? I promise you, you know, unicorns will will, you know, will cry gold nuggets in your yard every morning. It doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter because they're never going to do anything. And with term limits, gosh, this is one that gets me so bad because it's such a poor reflection on who we are. Yeah, we're the reason that we don't have term limits, not the Constitution. Yeah. The constituency, not the Constitution does have term limits. It does look, read the document. Two years for Congress, four years for president, six years for senator. It has term limits. Yeah, that's right. And the reason we the reason we look and say, well, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell and uh Robert Byrd and you know, any one of these people, they served for 80 years, whatever it was, you know. Yeah, but they were voted into office.

SPEAKER_01 19:18

Yep, they're they're constituents.

SPEAKER_02 19:20

They were voted by people. The constituency wanted those people. I still see people voting for that Lindsey Graham is gonna win. Yep. How is Lindsey Graham voted by the people of South Carolina every six years? But he is. They get addicted to the benefits that a person of Lindsey Graham's stature gets sent to South Carolina. Right? They like the jobs and the roads and the the new the new uh city halls and the new uh gyms and all these things that he sends them by virtue of his position. So they're never gonna they don't they're not gonna vote for someone who promises to be constitutional because being constitutional means all that stuff dries up overnight. That's right. That's right. And so they look at Lindsey Graham, who runs as a Republican, but legislates as a communist. That's right. Exactly. And they vote for him because why? Because we just believe things when people say them, particularly when they're said by someone who has 24-7 unlimited free access to the media. If that man opens his mouth, someone's gonna be there to record it. And if you're Joe Sixpack running against him, why you've got to pay for advertising, you've got to pay to for town halls to try and get in front of the people, you've got to try and induce the people to come to your meeting. But Lindsey Graham doesn't have to worry about all that because he's an incumbent. Well, why is he an incumbent? Because the people of South Carolina keep voting for him. That's right. So ask not for whom the bell tolls. You know, it's that whole man in the mirror. You want term limits? Well, you got them. Bob bibbity bobbity boo. There you go. There you go, sir, Mr. and Mrs. America. I just gave you term limits. It's called two years, four years, and six years. There you go. We don't need a constitutional convention, we don't need a term limits amendment. I just gave you. Well, that only matters if the person voting changes his heart and desires to see the constitution followed.

SPEAKER_01 21:50

Yep.

Good People Discouraged From Serving

SPEAKER_02 21:52

We don't need it fixed, we need it followed, Doc. That's all. We don't need it fixed, we need it followed. And I think and Thanks, you know, we're thankful for you and all you do in that regard to try and educate people. The this scheme of term limits would be so unconstitutional and frankly, God, so unrepublican. This is the thing that gets me is you know, what is a republic? It's James Madison says it's a scheme of government whereby the people rule through elected representatives. Well, think about term limits. You're telling the people I don't care who you want to vote for, that person's no longer eligible. Now think about how unrepublican that is. And think about Article 4, Doc. Article 4 of the Constitution guarantees to every state in the Union a Republican form of government. Now think about that. That is a constitutional guarantee, and there are a few of those. It guarantees to every state a Republican form of government. Well, you think about this, all the listeners here of the Good Doctor Show, listen to this. By telling you you cannot vote for someone, doesn't that take away your Republican right to vote?

SPEAKER_01 23:10

That's right. It does. We in South Carolina would have never had a Strom Thurman that we really liked and voted for over and over and over again if we determine limited him right out of office.

SPEAKER_02 23:23

We would not have a Thomas Massey up there fighting against all this unconstitutional war stuff, and against uh the Epstein stuff, and against uh Second Amendment restriction stuff. He would be he would have been gone years ago. And all the good ones would be gone. But I and that's true, it creates a complete temp temp worker congress. But I want you to think about this. It denies people their right to vote for the person that they believe would be best for the job. Now, whether or not I agree that that person would be best for the job is irrelevant with regard to the analysis of a Republican form of government. A Republican form of government that guarantees the right of the people to elect their representatives. Well, if I tell you that that guy's been term-limited out and you can't vote for him, I've just denied you the right to vote for the person you see most fit. And this is the constitutional challenge that the COS and Convention of States people cannot get passed. And I'm gonna tell you, Doc, that if they ever were to get close to getting this convention called, it wouldn't happen for years because we would tie it up in the courts.

SPEAKER_01 24:43

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 24:44

Because we would challenge such a convention on re on violation of Article IV and the guarantee of Republican form of government.

SPEAKER_01 24:53

You're right. You're exactly right. All right, all right. Well listen, this is good stuff, Joe. I mean, it gives my folks a lot to listen to uh think about, and I really appreciate it. Now I I got one more thing I want us to talk about if you can come back one more time next week. Yes, sir. I want us to talk about the authority and right of the states to nullify federal overreach. And every time you talk about nullification, folks get all tied up in a knot, and they think, well, the federal government's gonna come in with tanks and military to set us straight uh if we try to nullify an action or an overreach of the federal government. And I want us to talk about that, and I want our listeners to hear about the state's privilege and authority and their right to actually nullify federal overreach. We don't let's not get started because I know if we get started we'll never stop. So let's let's just hold that off for next week.

SPEAKER_02 25:55

It's a cliffhanger.

SPEAKER_01 25:56

It is a cliffhanger, but it's an amazing discussion that we need to talk about, and uh, and you probably need to give us some some material to read. When next time we talk about it, let's have some some suggested reading material. Can we do that too?

SPEAKER_02 26:10

Well, yeah, let's do that today and have people kind of prepared for the discussion. If they go to jbs.org.

SPEAKER_01 26:16

Okay.

SPEAKER_02 26:18

Uh I'm trying to get the exact link here. It's jbs.org slash states.

SPEAKER_01 26:25

All right.

SPEAKER_02 26:26

And just read anything and everything. Watch the video on that page, read everything, look at everything, and you'll be prepared for this discussion. And it'll be a little bit like softening the beach for some people who've uh taken a stand against nullification. There's uh there's there's a video there, there's a couple paragraphs of an intro, and then we have overview, we have action tools, we have lessons, uh, you know, it has a link to my book, uh What Degree of Madness, which is all about how to return power to the states. Uh, and it has a link to it there. So all of that stuff is there and available, and I would encourage your listeners to please take availability of that. It's jbs.org slash states.

SPEAKER_01 27:12

Good, good. All right. Time's up. Listen, thank you, Joe Wolverton. I appreciate your time. And you're listening to More Than Medicine. I'm your host, Dr. Robert Jackson. Remember this Jesus loves you and your doctor loves you. We'll be back again next week. Until then, may the Lord bless you. Real good.

Illusory Promises And Incumbency Power

SPEAKER_03 27:32

Thank you for listening to this edition of More Than Medicine. For more information about the Dr. Family Medicine, Instagram or webcam, Dr. FamilyMedict.com.