Texas Candidates And Michelle Obama Boost Term Limits Push

Calls for term limits in American politics are reaching a fever pitch, as both grassroots movements and high-profile voices emphasize the need for fresh leadership and a break from entrenched incumbency. On January 21, 2026, this growing sentiment took center stage in Texas’s 23rd Congressional District, where a slate of candidates—including Francisco Canseco—publicly pledged to support a constitutional amendment that would cap congressional service at three terms in the House and two in the Senate. This move, praised by the nonpartisan advocacy group U.S. Term Limits (USTL), reflects a broader national push to rein in career politicians and revitalize American democracy.

USTL, which describes itself as the largest nonpartisan, nonprofit organization solely dedicated to term limits, has been at the forefront of this campaign. According to a press release issued by the group, Canseco’s pledge was joined by fellow candidates Gretel Enck, Santos Limon, Brandon Herrera, and the district’s incumbent, Rep. Ernest Gonzales. As of January 21, USTL counted more than 150 sitting members of Congress who have signed on to their pledge, signaling a groundswell of institutional support for the idea.

Philip Blumel, president of U.S. Term Limits, did not mince words in his praise for the candidates. “This strong support of term limits shows that there are individuals who are willing to put self-interest aside to follow the will of the people. America needs a Congress that will be served by citizen legislators, not career politicians,” he declared. The pledge itself is simple but direct: signers commit, if elected, to co-sponsor and vote for a constitutional amendment that would limit congressional service to three terms in the House and two in the Senate, with no further extensions.

The movement is not just a fringe cause. According to a nationwide Pew Research poll cited by USTL, a staggering 87% of Americans support limiting the number of terms members of Congress can serve. Even more striking, 56% say they strongly favor such a proposal, and only 12% are opposed. Pew’s analysis underscores the bipartisan nature of this sentiment—term limits are one of the rare issues that unite Americans across the political spectrum.

Why, then, has Congress not acted? The answer, as always, lies in the mechanics of constitutional change. To become law, the proposed amendment would need to clear a daunting series of hurdles: a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, followed by ratification from at least 38 states. It’s a steep climb, but advocates argue that the overwhelming public support gives the movement a fighting chance.

Blumel is adamant that the time for action is now. “America is in trouble. Our career politicians have let the people down. It is time to return control of our nation to the people. It is time for a constitutional amendment limiting congressional terms,” he said in the USTL statement. The group’s mission, he added, is to “improve the quality of government with a citizen legislature that closely reflects its constituency and is responsive to the needs of the people it serves.” Notably, USTL does not endorse individual candidates; rather, it seeks to hold the entire institution accountable by advocating for systemic reform.

This surge of support for term limits is not limited to congressional races. The debate has also reached the highest levels of American politics, with former First Lady Michelle Obama weighing in forcefully on the subject. In a candid conversation on the “Call Her Daddy” podcast released Wednesday, Obama made it clear she would “actively work against” any effort to allow her husband, former President Barack Obama, to seek a third term—should constitutional barriers be removed.

Asked by host Alex Cooper whether Barack Obama might consider running again if the law were changed, Michelle Obama responded with a laugh, “I hope not.” She added, “I would be at home working against it. And maybe a lot of people would be like, ‘Good, we don’t want him anyway.’” Her remarks come at a time when former President Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of a potential third-term run, despite the clear restrictions of the 22nd Amendment.

Michelle Obama defended the two-term limit for presidents as a vital safeguard for American democracy. “I do believe in the need for new vision,” she said. “The two terms is not just about ‘we like them and we want’—it’s just like, we’re changing and growing so fast. This is a hard job. And it requires new energy, new vision all the time, new ways of looking at the world.” She went on to question the wisdom of sticking with the same leaders indefinitely: “There’s so many talented people out there. Why would we keep going with the same people?”

Her comments reflect a broader anxiety about political stagnation and the aging of American leadership. “How are we going to build young leaders if the same people keep doing it again, and again and again?” she asked. While acknowledging the value of the wisdom that comes with age, Obama stressed the importance of making space for new ideas and fresh perspectives. “I do believe that eight years is enough,” she said, emphasizing that the next generation of leaders brings a worldliness and adaptability that is essential for tackling contemporary challenges. “This new generation is coming up: They travel more, they know more about the world, they’re exposed in a different way. I’m really, really curious about their perspectives on how to fix some of this stuff.”

Pressed again on whether she would support a third term for her husband if the law were changed, Obama was unequivocal: “I hope not. I would actively work against that.” Her words echo the national mood, as reflected in the Pew poll, and reinforce the argument that term limits are not just a procedural issue, but a question of democratic renewal and generational change.

Of course, not everyone is convinced that term limits are a panacea. Critics warn that restricting terms could lead to a loss of experience and institutional memory in Congress, making it harder for lawmakers to navigate complex policy issues. Some argue that term limits would simply shift power to unelected staffers, lobbyists, and bureaucrats, who are not subject to the same democratic checks. Others contend that voters already have the power to impose term limits at the ballot box, and that constitutional amendments are a blunt instrument for addressing deeper problems of political accountability.

Still, the momentum is undeniable. With candidates in Texas’s 23rd District and elsewhere signing on to the USTL pledge, and with prominent voices like Michelle Obama lending their support to the principle of leadership turnover, the term limits movement is gaining traction. Whether or not Congress ultimately acts, the debate itself is forcing Americans to confront fundamental questions about power, representation, and the future of their democracy.

As the 2026 election cycle unfolds, the question of term limits—once a perennial talking point—has become a defining issue. The outcome will hinge not just on the votes of lawmakers, but on the collective will of a public that, by all accounts, is ready for change.