Just what is it that you think term limits will accomplish?

[PredFan]

For those of you who believe that more will get done if congressmen don't have to worry about campaigning, that is negated by having congressmen who have to learn the ropes every few years. Besides, do we really want Congress to actually accomplish a lot?

 

[Defiant1]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Pred, you will be getting a new congressman.

And I agree, term limits not needed. There will be several new congressmen in Florida and I'm sure more across the nation.

 

[PredFan]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Awww heck! Another liberal playing make believe.

I'm a liberal? That's news.

 

[Decus]

The problem is that we are too often faced with a choice of the "lesser of two evils" but feel that we are rarely given the choice of a better candidate. Elections are ruled by money and many people see term limits as perhaps a way of unseating "rich", special interest bankrolled incumbents.

Three alternative options to term limits:

• encourage and support the creation of more parties
• create a "no" vote where if the majority of votes cast are for the "no" option new candidates have to be selected
• all parties are capped in the amount they can spend

Term limits are the expression of voter disappointment in what appears to be little real choice in the candidates running for office.

.

 

[PredFan]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Pred, you will be getting a new congressman.

And I agree, term limits not needed. There will be several new congressmen in Florida and I'm sure more across the nation.

Yes, Grayson is on his way out, thank God.

 

[Fueri]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

 

[Defiant1]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Pred, you will be getting a new congressman.

And I agree, term limits not needed. There will be several new congressmen in Florida and I'm sure more across the nation.

Yes, Grayson is on his way out, thank God.

Great chance to elect a good Republican in his place.......lol

 

[miketx]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Awww heck! Another liberal playing make believe.

I'm a liberal? That's news.

Perhaps I mis-spoke.

 

[PredFan]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

 

[PredFan]

Pros and cons:

Pros:

Congressmen won't have to waste our time with a 2nd re-election.

Congressmen won't need to drum up money from special interests for a second re-election.

Corrupt or inept politicians will not be in office forever.

Cons:

Good and effective politicians will be lost.

Too often, the new congressmen will need to learn the ropes and thus reduce their effectiveness.

Congressional committees will be much less effective due to high turnover.

The people of the districts will lose much of their ability to control their representation.

 

[Fueri]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

you're not moving them out by voting, as the evidence shows. they establish themselves, pull in enough money to bury the competition and there they sit, regardless of what they do, so saying 'well, just vote' is not at all accurate, as it's not a level playing field and the longer they sit there, the more that field tilts.

I could list a number of congresspeople that were outright criminals and were still re-elected because of those factors. charlie rangel, for one, yes? That crook is still there.

With term limits you'll get another congressman, just like we get another president, and some cities get another mayor, every X number of years. Don't like that one? well they're gone in X number of years too and the one(s) that follow will have to more closely listen to the voters instead of simply running the opposition into the ground with superior money and a well established propaganda machine that can outshout and/or outsmear the other guy.

these long term people are de facto royalty, immovable by all but the most severe circumstances, if at all, serving and perpetuating an oligarchical system of which they and their money people are the primary benefactors and which runs directly contrary to the interests of the people they are supposedly there to serve. It is a total farce.

 

[PredFan]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

you're not moving them out by voting, as the evidence shows. they establish themselves, pull in enough money to bury the competition and there they sit, regardless of what they do, so saying 'well, just vote' is not at all accurate, as it's not a level playing field and the longer they sit there, the more that field tilts.

I could list a number of congresspeople that were outright criminals and were still re-elected because of those factors. charlie rangel, for one, yes? That crook is still there.

With term limits you'll get another congressman, just like we get another president, and some cities get another mayor, every X number of years. Don't like that one? well they're gone in X number of years too and the one(s) that follow will have to more closely listen to the voters instead of simply running the opposition into the ground with superior money and a well established propaganda machine that can outshout and/or outsmear the other guy.

these long term people are de facto royalty, immovable by all but the most severe circumstances, if at all, serving and perpetuating an oligarchical system of which they and their money people are the primary benefactors and which runs directly contrary to the interests of the people they are supposedly there to serve. It is a total farce.

It doesn't matter how much money they spend, it still comes down to votes. They are getting the votes because the people want to vote for them.

Do you actually think that term limits will take money out of the process??? You can seriously believe that.

A party or politician who sees a popular congressman's terms coming to an end will spend just as much money as anybody would have, and it will happen more frequently.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

Then the people of your state should pay his entire salary and pension not the rest of the country

 

[rightwinger]

Term Limits are for those who cannot win elections so they look for a way to keep the most qualified candidate from running

 

[rightwinger]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

Then the people of your state should pay his entire salary and pension not the rest of the country

You pay the same salary and pension regardless of who wins

 

[Skull Pilot]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

Then the people of your state should pay his entire salary and pension not the rest of the country

You pay the same salary and pension regardless of who wins

You don't understand

The people of for example MA should be paying their congress people's salaries and pensions since those people are representing the people of MA at the federal level they are not representing the people of CT or any other state so why should people in any other state pay for the congress people of a different state?

 

[Fueri]

If they do not have to worry about getting elected maybe they'll actually not be selling out the public to every special interest group that can shovel them enough money to help them keep their jobs.

I'm sure we can find another few hundred people every few years to fill those seats. Nobody loses their representation.

they're also spending a large percentage of their time fundraising instead of actually doing their actual jobs.

If I was padding my nest while on the clock at my former jobs I'd have been fired. If I was serving people that were screwing the people paying me I'd have been fired.

Instead of career leeches let's get people in there that might actually want to make a difference and then get them out before that cesspool corrupts them.

You will trade politicians who take special interest money for re-election for politicians who take special interest money to make themselves rich as possible before they are kicked out.

Also, what is wrong with special interest money? Personally, I can think of a couple of special interest groups that I like buying politicians, the BRA for example.

You won't get rid of corruption with term limits.

special interest money has completely corrupted our system. simply because you might agree that 1 or 2 of these groups are to your liking doesn't detract from the net influence of all of this bribery money, which is, without question, negative to the better interests of the country.

we won't get rid of corruption by continuing to support the same people that have corrupted the system either, it would seem to me. .

I'm not going to bother with the definition of insanity stuff. you know the drill.

continuing to support the same people that have clearly crashed the bus makes no sense whatsoever. Time to learn from our mistakes, move them out and prevent it from happening again.

what is the worst thing that can happen? congress is dysfunctional for a period of transition? It is already, beyond a shadow of a doubt, already dysfunctional.

Maybe we'll replace these crooks with other crooks, but that's at best a wash as well and likely a win as the new crooks won't be as proficient.

Sure, move them out but do it by voting.

What if I have a great congressman. He's doing exactly what my district wants him to do both for us and for the country, and he has been doing it for 12 years. Now I can't have him anymore and maybe I have two complete douchebags running for his seat. How is that to anyone's best interest?

you're not moving them out by voting, as the evidence shows. they establish themselves, pull in enough money to bury the competition and there they sit, regardless of what they do, so saying 'well, just vote' is not at all accurate, as it's not a level playing field and the longer they sit there, the more that field tilts.

I could list a number of congresspeople that were outright criminals and were still re-elected because of those factors. charlie rangel, for one, yes? That crook is still there.

With term limits you'll get another congressman, just like we get another president, and some cities get another mayor, every X number of years. Don't like that one? well they're gone in X number of years too and the one(s) that follow will have to more closely listen to the voters instead of simply running the opposition into the ground with superior money and a well established propaganda machine that can outshout and/or outsmear the other guy.

these long term people are de facto royalty, immovable by all but the most severe circumstances, if at all, serving and perpetuating an oligarchical system of which they and their money people are the primary benefactors and which runs directly contrary to the interests of the people they are supposedly there to serve. It is a total farce.

It doesn't matter how much money they spend, it still comes down to votes. They are getting the votes because the people want to vote for them.

Do you actually think that term limits will take money out of the process??? You can seriously believe that.

A party or politician who sees a popular congressman's terms coming to an end will spend just as much money as anybody would have, and it will happen more frequently.

So the money pouring into politics doesn't influence voting? That's not the case at all. We all know that.

do I think term limits will take money out of the process? no, but I see no reason not to solve part of the problem simply because it doesn't solve the entire problem.

It also seems far more likely to me that congresspeople that are not influenced by the desire to see this system perpetuate their own careers indefinitely may, if people demand it, then take further steps to limit the influence of money in elections and politics than these people that are so directly deriving benefits from it. Without moving these people and changing that equation that will never happen.

 

[Moonglow]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Then the president should not have term limits either...

Untrue. The president is not our representative, and he needs to have checks in his power.

he damn sure is our representative, he works for us....

 

[Montrovant]

Term Limits are for those who cannot win elections so they look for a way to keep the most qualified candidate from running

Are you for abolishing the term limits of the president?

Do you think that term limits are only supported by people who want to "keep the most qualified candidate from running"?

 

[Montrovant]

i have asked this question numerous times on Facebook but I'm not sure if I ever asked this here before.

For one thing, we already have term limits, they are called elections. If I like my congressman, and I like what he has done for my district, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?

If he in doing a shitty job, he'll get voted out. My representative is not there to serve the nation, he's there to represent my interests.

FYI, my congressman is Alan (crazier than Bernie Sanders) Grayson, but that doesn't change my opinion.

What do you think term limits will accomplish?

Then the president should not have term limits either...

Untrue. The president is not our representative, and he needs to have checks in his power.

The president is the representative of the entire nation, while Congresspeople represent their states.

There are already checks on presidential power. Congress and the Supreme Court are there as checks on the President.

If I like my president, and I like what he has done for my country, what right do you have to tell me I have to give him up?