Philip Blumel: Another term limit foe indicted. Hi, I’m Philip Blumel. Welcome to No Uncertain Terms, the official podcast of the Term Limits Movement. This is episode number 275, published on November 24, 2025.
Stacey Selleck: Your sanctuary from partisan politics.
Philip Blumel: Yes, yet again. If you’ve been listening to this podcast for a long time, then you’ve heard dozens of these stories. Corrupt legislators aren’t the only politicians who hate term limits, of course, but if you think about it, no politicians are going to be more adamantly opposed to such limitations on their power as actual criminals. They need power and access to do their dirty work and to help cover it up. The latest poster child for corrupt Congress members is U.S. Representative Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick of South Florida. She was indicted in Miami two weeks ago on charges that she stole and laundered $5 million in federal COVID relief funds. The Justice Department alleges that she used the money in part to pay for her congressional campaign. At U.S. Term Limits, we are quite familiar with Sheila. In fact, we currently maintain a billboard in her district calling her out for a different kind of corruption. When running for office in 2021, she signed the U.S. Term Limits pledge committing her to co-sponsor and vote for the term limits constitutional amendment bill that’s been introduced in the House.
Philip Blumel: You know, when she did so, press releases and social media posts went out and she basked in the positive coverage. But then after she won her special election in January ’22, she refused to co-sponsor the bill as she promised in writing or even communicate with us. This one hits close to home for me because she represents Delray Beach, Florida, which is about 20 minutes or so from where I live in West Palm Beach. The billboard that we have up is at Atlantic Avenue, just west of Congress Avenue. For you locals, it says Representative Cherfilus-McCormick is breaking her U.S. Term Limits pledge, and it has her picture there. So we already knew that Sheila was corrupt. She consciously lied in order to receive some benefits to help her win office. And then after winning office, her lie was exposed. Yeah, but so what? She might think once you’re in, you’re in. Well, over 90% of incumbents running for their own seat win re-election in the U.S. House. It’s this lack of competitiveness in congressional elections. Well, that’s the primary reason why we need term limits. Okay, let’s go back to her indictment. According to the Justice Department, Cherfilus-McCormick and her brother Edwin Cherfilus worked with their family healthcare company in 2021 on a COVID vaccination contract with FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Philip Blumel: They pocketed about $5 million in overpayments by routing them through various accounts to hide their origins. Sheila is alleged to have used the money to fill her own piggy bank, but also to fund her congressional campaign. She funneled the stolen money to family and friends who turned around and gave it back to McCormick in the form of campaign contributions, effectively laundering these funds. Sheila and also her tax preparer are being charged with falsifying her tax returns to conceal it all. Well, this is all in the indictment. No, I know she’s not been proven guilty. Her legal team says it’s all a big mix-up. Their statement says that Sheila, quote, is a committed public servant who is dedicated to her constituents. Well, we at U.S. Term Limits don’t have any special info about the embezzlement, but we already knew she was corrupt. Ironically, when Cherfilus-McCormick ran for that special election in 2022, she was running to fill the seat of Representative Alcee Hastings, who had held that seat for 28 years until his death in 2021. In that role, Alcee Hastings voted against the congressional term limits bills in the 1990s and refused to sign the U.S. Term Limits pledge.
Philip Blumel: Well, at least he was honest about opposing term limits, unlike Sheila, but he wasn’t honest about much else. As a federal judge, before running for Congress, Representative Alcee Hastings was indicted on charges he accepted a $150,000 bribe in exchange for reducing the prison terms of two convicted felons. Just for the record, this is not the kind of term limitation that U.S. Term Limits advocates for. Anyway, in 1988, the U.S. Senate convicted him on eight articles, making Hastings one of only eight federal officials in U.S. history to be removed from office by the Senate after a House impeachment. That’s when he decided to run for the U.S. Congress. You can’t make this stuff up. In a solid one-party district, Representative Hastings won and won again 14 times with minimal opposition. Seven of his 13 reelection races were unopposed. Now, of course, this isn’t because no one in the district wanted the job. It’s just that the power of incumbency makes it nearly impossible to beat an incumbent. So why bother trying? Remember, in the U.S. House, well over 90% of politicians running for their own seat win re-election. Crooked politicians like Hastings, like Cherfilus-McCormick, they hate term limits.
Philip Blumel: Of course they do. Corruption is something that is highly correlated to tenure due to the increase over time of both hubris and opportunity. Term limits also sever what you might call good old boy networks that unite the interests of politicians and make them incurious sometimes about their colleagues’ doings. Connected with that phenomena, term limits also expand the circle of those with intimate knowledge of the office in question. You know, John Adams called this the university in rotation. What he meant by that is that rotation in office results in an expanded pool of ex-politicians. People that had been in the position but are no longer. Now they’re out in the public or at least have a different position. These ex-politicians are people who know how the system works because they’ve been part of it, they’ve done it. It’s a vital part of a legislature’s institutional knowledge, transparency, and also the education of a polity. It means that more people are outside the government looking in and know what they’re looking at. Anyway, at the end of the day, Sheila has been helpful to the cause in one way. She provides even more evidence for the need for congressional term limits.
Philip Blumel: Next, we all know we need congressional term limits, but how to impose them? The Supreme Court told us in the 1995 case U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton that it has to be done by a constitutional amendment. But surely Congress will never limit itself. Former Maryland Congressman David Trone, a Democrat, and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican, are the two new co-chairs of the U.S. Term Limits campaign to call for an amendment writing convention limited to the subject of congressional term limits. Such a convention can be called by the states under Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution, and Congress has nothing to do with it. 34 states are required to trigger the convention according to the Constitution, and 12 have already done so. And that was before these two political heavyweights came on board. Trone and DeSantis are now taking this campaign to the national media. The bipartisan duo appeared on both CNN and Fox News during primetime since our last podcast two weeks ago. CNN was first. It was last Tuesday with Trone and DeSantis making the case with CNN lead Washington anchor Jake Tapper.
Jake Tapper: Thanks for being here, guys. We really appreciate it. So in a recent New York Times op-ed, you guys wrote, quote, “The House and the Senate are dominated by career politicians buoyed by reelection rates that routinely exceed 90%, who seem more concerned with clinging to power than serving the public.” How will term limits change that, do you think?
Speaker 4: Well, one, I mean, people support term limits. We’re a divided country on so many things. I’ve never seen an issue. Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, Black, white, rich, they support term limits. Why? Because we do need new blood in Congress, and people say, “Well, the election’s the term limit.” The incumbents hardwire this in with the party nominations, campaign finance, congressional franking. It is not an even playing field. And so doing congressional term limits forces turnover. And I think it will draw a great class of people to want to serve.
Jake Tapper: How will you force your former colleagues to willingly give up power? Because obviously this would have to become something that goes through the House and the Senate.
Speaker 5: Congress has to pass it, but we’ve got to start with the state legislatures. They get Article 5 amendments and force a convention, possibly at the state legislature. But by 34 states, if they sign up, we have 12 already. Then they’re going to have to have a constitutional convention on limited term limits only. 50 states will determine what they want to do. That’s out of control of Congress. Then after it’s ratified by 38 states, it would become law. But that’ll never happen. Never, never. Because Congress will step in to save their own skin and grandfather themselves in and pick a number. They’ll pick a number we might not agree with. The number might be. It doesn’t matter. Congress will control that.
Jake Tapper: So one of the best arguments I’ve heard against term limits is that it will end up empowering the unelected, meaning lobbyists and staffers. What’s your response to that?
Speaker 4: Could they be any more empowered, Jake? I mean, think about it. We have a massive bureaucracy. Some people like it, I don’t. That is exercising massive amounts… It’s a fourth branch of government. Congress has given away its power over the years. Congress doesn’t do appropriations like they’re supposed to. They do massive omnibus bills. Who’s writing those omnibus bills? Is that a deliberative process? No, that’s congressional staff that’s doing it. So I think they’re already very powerful. I don’t see how the balance could be tipped anymore. What I think may happen, I think will happen: you have new blood, there’ll be reformers, and it’s not going to be good enough to say, “Well, this is how we’ve always done it.” How you’re doing it has not worked for this country.
Speaker 5: Very well said, but I think we should add that Jack Abramoff, the omega lobbyist who did prison for years in 2008, his comment was, “I don’t like term limits.” No lobbyist likes term limits because then we have to repurchase new legislators. It’s a bad day.
Jake Tapper: So what about the argument that you’re taking away choice from the voters? Because, you know, let’s just say there are some people who actually think they have good representation in Congress. Let’s assume that your constituents when you were a member of the House and your constituents when you were a member of the House, what about that? Like, some of these people are good at their jobs and they want them.
Speaker 4: So there are definitely going to be examples where people are doing great and they’re going to be term limited out, but that’s going to be outweighed by the good that’s going to come from liberating people from the entrenched political class that has caused so many problems. And so no one’s ever said it’s 100% panacea, but I think we’ll be much better off if we have term limits. And interestingly, the founders thought about doing term limits and they decided not to. Part of it’s like, why would people want to be in Congress for 30 years? They just didn’t think it would be, you’re in horse and buggy. I think the founders today would say that it would be a good, positive reform.
Jake Tapper: By CNN’s count, with a little less than one year until the midterms of 2026, 37 House members, including 22 Republicans, 15 Democrats, plan to leave Congress. That’s more than usual. Another argument from them might be we don’t need to change the Constitution. There’s already turnover.
Speaker 5: Turnover is just so negligible. And as you said, with 95% reelection rate and everyone staying 30, 40 years, I saw a comment the other day that said, you know, Congress is less popular than traffic jams. That’s a bad day. I mean, nothing is getting done in this toxic atmosphere. We’ve got to see new ideas. That’s what’s got to rule.
Speaker 4: And I think what happens is seniority plays such a big role. So it’s true there’ll be people that only serve two terms because they get frustrated because there’s no upward mobility. I mean, I remember when I was in, like every Democrat ranking member, I think, was probably in their 70s. A lot of the Republicans were there. So you literally have to say you’re going to do 20, 25, 30 years to actually be in a position where you’re going to be able to exercise, you know, significant influence over the legislative process. A lot of people get burnt out from that. They’re like, “I don’t want to do that.” So the turnover, I think, is pushing out some idealistic people who are running into the congressional meat grinder.
Speaker 5: Governor hit the best damn point there: It’s in eliminating the seniority system out of a system based on merit and good ideas and a sense of urgency that we’ve got to get something done, serve and go home.
Jake Tapper: The founding fathers did not put in term limits for the president either, but they were added after FDR. President Trump faces those term limits. He is not going to be able to run for reelection in 2028. Are you thinking of maybe running?
Speaker 4: I’m not thinking about anything because I think we have a president now who’s not even been in for a year. We’ve got a lot that we’ve got to accomplish. I’m obviously working hard to put votes on the board in Florida. But look at the election results two weeks ago for Republicans, that was not good. You know, we’ve got to do a good job as Republicans. And I think that should be the number one priority. And the way you do well in the midterm elections is to produce positive results. And so I would focus on that. This jockeying and all that I don’t think is productive for us. Get things done for people. You know, we showed in Florida when I came in, we were a purple state. You know, now we’re considered a red state because we produce results and people followed.
Philip Blumel: The next night they spoke with Bret Baier on Fox News. Let’s hear that one, too.
Bret Baier: The general public does not believe that politicians ought to come up here and just live on the federal government. The founders did not… The Constitution did not intend that.
Speaker 4: We have to start liberating politicians to speak the truth. I think we need term limits to provide an incentive to do so.
Bret Baier: Well, tonight’s Common Ground segment: the effort to end congressional careerism. We’re talking about term limits. Our guests are calling for a congressional amendment to solidify term limits. Joining us, Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis and former Maryland Democratic Congressman David Trone. Gentlemen, thanks for being here. This is a big issue. It’s talked about pretty much every election. Governor, there’s a lot of people who say this has to happen now.
Speaker 4: Yeah, absolutely. And what we’re doing is we’re working through the states. We know people in Congress are not going to be interested in ejecting themselves out of office. So Article 5 of the Constitution provides a pathway for states to propose an amendment. This is a bottom-up movement. Here’s the thing, Bret: Republican, Democrat, rich, poor, Black, white, huge support for term limits across the board. Very few things unite the American electorate in this divided era of politics more than the need for term limits.
Bret Baier: So let me do the pushback, Congressman, and that is somebody gets up on Capitol Hill, they finally figure out the way that this place operates, which is not easy to do if you’ve not been up there, and you finally get there and then you’re term limited. So what’s the benefit versus the negative?
Speaker 5: I guess you kind of think about, is it working now? Well, that’s pretty easy. I mean, Congress is less popular than traffic jams, so it’s clearly not working now. So we’ve got to do something different. We need new ideas. New ideas get you new people. And that just disables the seniority system. The seniority system, which the Governor and I have talked about, is where you’ve got folks that are there for 20, 30, 40 years. They don’t get power until 30, 40 years in. We need young folks, different folks, farmers, business people to come into Congress, bring their new ideas and use merit, not who lives the longest. Why do we let the people in charge who happen to live the longest? Seems like it ought to be about merit.
Speaker 4: But when you look at the seniority, so you come in maybe idealistic, and then you’ve got people that have been there 30 years who are the chairmen of the committees. So the people that tend to not stay for 30 years, I think, have good intentions, and they get disillusioned because they’re blocked from advancing.
Bret Baier: If you look at the average years of service for members of the 119th Congress in the House, 8.6 years; Senate, 11.2. The percent of congressional incumbents reelected in 2020, 96%, 2024, 97%. To your point, Congressman, that power of incumbency comes with a lot.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it absolutely just stifles innovation and a sense of urgency. You know, in business, you’ve got to be first and you’ve got to get out there. And in Congress, they’re just coasting and coasting and coasting. And then think about who’s against this: members of Congress and the lobbyists. Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist who went to jail, spent four years in jail. You know, he said he didn’t want to have to repurchase new members. That’s why he was against term limits.
Speaker 4: Well, and if you also think, people say, “Well, isn’t the term limit just the election? ” And honestly, on the surface, it’s a good point. Incumbents make the system benefit incumbents. They have campaign finance that’s written to help incumbents, congressional franking. There’s things that don’t make it an even playing field. Most of the congressional districts in this country are going to elect either one party or the other. So then the whole thing is the party primary. So term limits would force turnover and it would honestly give more people an opportunity to serve.
Bret Baier: Yeah. And the approval of Congress is upside down. I mean, right now it’s 18% approve, 71% disapprove. That’s a good day. Both of you, while you’re on your way out to finish terms you finished, do you feel like you have more to do in the elected office space?
Speaker 4: I think this is… I wish that this could be done in the next year and a half, but I think it’s going to take a little bit longer than that. This is a hanging curveball politically for members of state legislatures. And guess what? It’s in their interest to do it. You’re term-limiting people in Congress, you’re a state senator. Hey, you’ve got an opportunity to be a congressman someday
Bret Baier: I mean, are you going to get back in the game as far as elected…?
Speaker 5: We got 12 states… I’m focused on this right now. 12 states have already done it. So we’re 12 states there. We need 34 states. But somewhere in the 20s, it’ll force a constitutional convention. And then when Congress sees that coming, as the Governor said, they’re going to act on it.
Bret Baier: 1997, Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America said term limits were going to be a part of it. They did vote on it, but they came short of the two-thirds needed to send it on.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Bret Baier: Have you decided whether you’re going to run for president again?
Speaker 4: No, because we have one president that just got in office less than a year ago, and that’s really the opportunity to change the country. There’s obviously been a lot of positive, shutting the border and some of the other things. But Congress needs to be more productive. There’s a lot more meat on the bone for them to do. And if you look at what happened in the elections two weeks ago, Republicans got their clocks cleaned going into the midterms. You’ve got to have a different dynamic. And I think the way you keep Congress is to be productive for these members to produce good legislation. It can’t be all President Trump’s shoulders having to do executive orders.
Bret Baier: And is this affordability issue, the way it’s talked about, very powerful?
Speaker 4: It is powerful because if you think about it, we had record inflation for how many years? Inflation is down from the height of Biden and the rate, no question. But the old prices don’t come back. So if you’re at 3%, that compounds everything. Well, people got to afford utility bills, they got to afford mortgage payments, they got to afford insurance, they got to afford all these things, groceries. And so the old prices haven’t come back. And that’s just the reality.
Bret Baier: And you’re a businessman. You see it from the other side as well. Businesses being squeezed.
Speaker 5: Businesses are clearly being squeezed. And when you just think about it, 70% of the folks in Congress are either professional career politicians or lawyers. We need a representation of America and not just some elitist group that stays and perpetuates their own power.
Bret Baier: Gentlemen, thanks so much.
Philip Blumel: You know, this is significant. We have 12 states officially calling for a term limits convention. We have 150 Congress members pledged in writing to co-sponsor and vote for a constitutional amendment that has been introduced in the U.S. Congress. We have important national political figures tying their wagons to this campaign. The issue is attracting the attention of primetime national news. We are confident when enough states apply for the term limits convention, that Congress will see the writing on the wall and act itself in its own self-interest, preempting the convention. Let’s find out if we’re right. Next, one way to amplify the voices of Trone and DeSantis is the tried and true letter to the editor. These are starting to appear. Gene Goddard of St. Paul, Minnesota was inspired to write one to the Wall Street Journal last week after reading a Journal news article announcing the end of the government shutdown.
Philip Blumel: It’s really good. Let me read it in its entirety. “Politicians in Washington may consider brinksmanship a high form of high-stakes negotiation, but ordinary people realize that no one fared well in the latest impasse. A shutdown is a contest of wills focused on political gain. But what is won? Every shutdown deepens the cynical view that elected officials care more about partisan fighting than governing, causing approval ratings to plummet. Each instance normalizes a dangerous form of political extortion, weakening the system itself. The root cause of this dysfunction is a system that rewards careerism over public service. When an office becomes a lifetime occupation, the incentive shifts from solving national problems to securing re-election and protecting seniority. The powerful antidote is imposing term limits for everyone in Congress.
Philip Blumel: A fixed tenure would fundamentally change a legislator’s priorities. Knowing time is limited, achieving tangible legislative results, which often requires bipartisan negotiation, would outweigh short-term political posturing. Term limits would also help sever the deep, long-standing ties between entrenched politicians and special interests, reducing the infighting that leads to gridlock. Governing shouldn’t require a crisis to pass a basic budget. The real and lasting damage of every shutdown is borne not by the legislators in the Capitol, but by the workers, families, and businesses across the country. Implementing term limits is a critical step to inject accountability, collaboration, and a spirit of true public service back into the heart of our government.” Gene Goddard, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Philip Blumel: Good work, Gene. Thank you very much. And you know, letters to the editor like this matter. The letters section is one of the most widely read sections of the newspaper, I’m told, and the Wall Street Journal has the largest print circulation of any newspaper in the U.S. The New York Times has even a larger circulation if you count their online subscribers. And it was on this editorial page where David Trone and Ron DeSantis initially announced their partnership in support of the U.S. Term Limits convention campaign. New York Times, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Fox News, not bad for two weeks. I know you can feel it. The time is now. Throw some more kindling on the fire. Please consider writing a letter to the editor yourself. If it runs, send us a copy or link. You can send it to me at podcast@termlimits.com.
Philip Blumel: Next, speaking of Minnesota, this unrelated item came across my desk about the same time as Gene Goddard’s letter to the Journal. Since 2016, 56-year-old Rich Draheim of Madison Lake, Minnesota has served as a Minnesota senator. Last week he announced he will not seek re-election. In a statement, Draheim said, “After careful consideration and discussion with my family, I’ve decided not to seek reelection after my term ends in 2026.
Philip Blumel: I believe in term limits and after 10 years in the Senate, it’s time to give others the opportunity to serve in the Legislature. Everyone has something to offer and there needs to be fresh voices in St. Paul, ” he continued. “Serving in the Minnesota Senate has been a highlight of my career. I see public service as an opportunity to give back and I’m proud of my 10 years of service. And after 10 years, it’s time to give others the chance to represent District 22. Fresh voices and new perspectives keep government efficient and honest.” You hear? So after three decades in business, 10 years in the Senate, and a recent PhD he completed at age 52, he’s ready to move on to the next stage of his life and career. Thank you, Senator Draheim, and good luck in all your future endeavors.
Stacey Selleck: Like the show? You can 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.
Philip Blumel: If your state has already passed the term limits convention resolution or the bills have not been introduced in your state, you can still help. Please consider making a contribution to U.S. Term Limits. It is our aim to hit the reset button on the U.S. 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 @termlimits. Like us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and now LinkedIn. USTL.