Term Limits?

[Big Black Dog]

I believe that there should be term limits on the people elected to Congress. I think two terms is more than enough time to spend as one of the country's lawmakers. This doesn't mean you can do two terms in the House and then two terms in the Senate and keep bouncing back and forth. Two terms, regardless of which house of Congress and you're out of there. I also do not believe that Congressmen or Congresswomen should get a lifetime pension after serving a single term in Congress. If there are term limits, I don't think they should get a pension at all. In addition, I believe that their free medical care should end the day they depart from their service to the country.

Please participate in the poll. What say you?

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

I say let the democratic process work and allow the people to choose who they see is best fit to represent their district or state.

 

[dilloduck]

What if the person I want isn't some rich dude (or dudette) with the ability to buy a lot of influence ?

 

[AVG-JOE]

I voted 'YES', with the only trepidation being that many lobbyists employed by special interests are either former congress-critters or former staff.

Make mercenary lobbying a capital offense against the people and limit congress to two terms and we may just get our government back.

Sure as shit couldn't hurt.​

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It would require an amendment to the Constitution to be implemented as of right now it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

I am opposed to any such amendment. I am in favor of an amendment returning the right of the Presidency to be held for more then 2 terms.

The Voters are responsible, this is just another way to take away responsibility from the voters.

 

[whaleboat]

Our Constitution is a beatifully crafted system of checks and balances . The fact that as originally designed , state legislatures appointed senators and the electors that elected the president , was intended to keep ultimate power close to the people . As the regular Joe has an easier time getting to know his state legislature . And the Constitution itself checks the power of the people .

 

[Polk]

it would require an amendment to the constitution to be implemented as of right now it is unconstitutional.

I am opposed to any such amendment. I am in favor of an amendment returning the right of the presidency to be held for more then 2 terms.

The voters are responsible, this is just another way to take away responsibility from the voters.

+1

 

[dilloduck]

Our Constitution is a beatifully crafted system of checks and balances . The fact that as originally designed , state legislatures appointed senators and the electors that elected the president , was intended to keep ultimate power close to the people . As the regular Joe has an easier time getting to know his state legislature . And the Constitution itself checks the power of the people .

Dream on---with a basically rigged election system, power has been slowly but surely removed from the people.

 

[Polk]

Our Constitution is a beatifully crafted system of checks and balances . The fact that as originally designed , state legislatures appointed senators and the electors that elected the president , was intended to keep ultimate power close to the people . As the regular Joe has an easier time getting to know his state legislature . And the Constitution itself checks the power of the people .

Dream on---with a basically rigged election system, power has been slowly but surely removed from the people.

Term limits won't fix that.

 

[goldcatt]

I'm on the fence about term limits. On one hand, I can see how limiting a pol's time in office can help with the cycle of big money ties and corruption. On the other hand, it smacks of trying to protect people from themselves. Pragmatically pseaking, campaign finance reform and limiting the revolving door would probably do more but the nitwits who benefit most from the status quo aren't likely to enact the measures needed. Ideally, people should be able to vote for whomever they choose even if that person is firmly entrenched in the system. Decisions, decisions....

 

[namvet]

absolutely YES !!!!. get this old decaying garbage and shit out of there. their toally asleep at the wheel. even if takes a fire hose to flush it all out.

http://www.termlimits.org/

 

[bodecea]

I believe that there should be term limits on the people elected to Congress. I think two terms is more than enough time to spend as one of the country's lawmakers. This doesn't mean you can do two terms in the House and then two terms in the Senate and keep bouncing back and forth. Two terms, regardless of which house of Congress and you're out of there. I also do not believe that Congressmen or Congresswomen should get a lifetime pension after serving a single term in Congress. If there are term limits, I don't think they should get a pension at all. In addition, I believe that their free medical care should end the day they depart from their service to the country.

Please participate in the poll. What say you?

So, if the people of a state or district really like their representative, you want to take their right to keep that person away from them.

 

[bodecea]

absolutely YES !!!!. get this old decaying garbage and shit out of there. their toally asleep at the wheel. even if takes a fire hose to flush it all out.

http://www.termlimits.org/

Yes, I can see you being in support of taking the right to choose their representatives away from the People.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I believe this thread is a canard. Making law is not an easy task and as in most jobs it takes a while to learn the craft. The real reform necessary is to limit what members of Congress get from stakeholders. Anyone who says the campaign donations do not influence legislators is a liar; donations to any elected official are bribes. Giving jobs to the son, daughters, nephews, nieces, spouses, etc of any elected official is a bribe. Promising a job to an elected offical in the future is a bribe. Taking any elected offical on vacaton, to super bowls or to play golf in the UK is a bribe.
Anyone have a different opinion?

 

[asaratis]

I believe this thread is a canard. Making law is not an easy task and as in most jobs it takes a while to learn the craft. The real reform necessary is to limit what members of Congress get from stakeholders. Anyone who says the campaign donations do not influence legislators is a liar; donations to any elected official are bribes. Giving jobs to the son, daughters, nephews, nieces, spouses, etc of any elected official is a bribe. Promising a job to an elected offical in the future is a bribe. Taking any elected offical on vacaton, to super bowls or to play golf in the UK is a bribe.
Anyone have a different opinion?

We have the finest representatives that money can buy.

Term limits would help to prevent entrenchment of crooked politicians. That's a plus. However, their replacements will likely be comparably crooked.

Term limits would keep a well-liked, productive representative from running again. That's a negative.

I say let's invoke term limits, but allow the politicians who have reached their limits to run again and be seated only if they garner 60% of the votes cast. If they don't, they can ship a term and then run again.

 

[goldcatt]

I believe this thread is a canard. Making law is not an easy task and as in most jobs it takes a while to learn the craft. The real reform necessary is to limit what members of Congress get from stakeholders. Anyone who says the campaign donations do not influence legislators is a liar; donations to any elected official are bribes. Giving jobs to the son, daughters, nephews, nieces, spouses, etc of any elected official is a bribe. Promising a job to an elected offical in the future is a bribe. Taking any elected offical on vacaton, to super bowls or to play golf in the UK is a bribe.
Anyone have a different opinion?

We have the finest representatives that money can buy.

Term limits would help to prevent entrenchment of crooked politicians. That's a plus. However, their replacements will likely be comparably crooked.

Term limits would keep a well-liked, productive representative from running again. That's a negative.

I say let's invoke term limits, but allow the politicians who have reached their limits to run again and be seated only if they garner 60% of the votes cast. If they don't, they can ship a term and then run again.

Interesting idea. But what happens if the incumbent wins with less than 50%?

 

[Polk]

I'm still trying to figure out how you guys can honestly think increasing the power of special interests over elections is going to result in more representative outcomes.

 

[goldcatt]

I'm still trying to figure out how you guys can honestly think increasing the power of special interests over elections is going to result in more representative outcomes.

The political parties themselves qualify as "special interests", Polk. They're nothing but private clubs with their own agendas, after all. If you have a proposal for getting rid of their influence, I'm all ears.

 

[Polk]

I'm still trying to figure out how you guys can honestly think increasing the power of special interests over elections is going to result in more representative outcomes.

The political parties themselves qualify as "special interests", Polk. They're nothing but private clubs with their own agendas, after all. If you have a proposal for getting rid of their influence, I'm all ears.

There is a big difference between a group of people who share a broad common agenda and groups lobbying for narrow protections for specific groups. However, if you view political parties as the problem, term limits won't help with that either. If anything, candidates will be more dependent on party infrastructure than they already are.

 

[keee keee]

Black dog drop their medical insurance and enroll them promply into OBAMACARE!!!