🧠 Incumbency Advantage Is Not Democratic Neutrality

While elections technically allow voters to remove officials, the reality is skewed:

- Over 90% of congressional incumbents are re-elected—even in years of low public approval.
- Incumbents benefit from name recognition, fundraising networks, and gerrymandered districts, creating a near-impenetrable wall for challengers.

This isn’t a level playing field—it’s a system that rewards entrenchment over accountability.

---

🧬 Elections Alone Don’t Prevent Corruption or Stagnation

Long tenures can breed complacency, entitlement, and influence from special interests:

- Former lobbyist Jack Abramoff admitted that once a congressional office is “bought,” it doesn’t need to be re-bought for years.
- Career politicians often prioritize re-election over bold, necessary decisions—term limits would free them to legislate with courage, not caution.

Elections may remove the worst offenders, but they don’t prevent the slow erosion of integrity.

---

🔄 Fresh Perspectives Strengthen Governance

Term limits inject new energy, ideas, and diversity into leadership:

- They reduce the grip of entrenched power structures and open doors for younger, more representative voices.
- New legislators are less beholden to “the way things have always been,” and more likely to challenge outdated norms.

This isn’t instability—it’s renewal.

---

🛡️ Term Limits Protect Against Systemic Failure

If elections are the only check, what happens when the system itself is compromised?

- Gerrymandering, voter suppression, and dark money distort electoral outcomes.
- Term limits act as a constitutional safeguard—ensuring turnover even when elections are manipulated or corrupted.

They’re a failsafe, not a substitute.

---