Trump says he would impose term limits for members of Congress

Discussion in 'Congress' started by nicoleivy5, Oct 20, 2016.

  1. Two Thumbs
    Offline

    Two Thumbs Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    35,350
    Thanks Received:
    6,022
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Where ever I go, there I am.
    Ratings:
    +13,207
    he can do that all he wants, however I can assure you, not one of those people are going to write the bill that ensures their unemployment, let alone for for it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Southern Dad
    Offline

    Southern Dad Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    Messages:
    127
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +145
    You want term limits because you can't beat the candidate at the ballot box so you want to use laws to disqualify him or her from being a choice for the voters. If you can't win at the ballot box, change the rules.
     
  3. Billy_Kinetta
    Offline

    Billy_Kinetta Paladin of the Lost Hour Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2013
    Messages:
    22,370
    Thanks Received:
    4,338
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +25,807
    Because it would prevent an ocean of corruption. Don't hear well, eh?
     
  4. Southern Dad
    Offline

    Southern Dad Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    Messages:
    127
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +145
    No, it simply removes a choice from the voters. That's it. Many states have term limits on governors. How many of them have been found to be corrupt? I think Illinois has two governors currently serving time.
     
  5. Billy_Kinetta
    Offline

    Billy_Kinetta Paladin of the Lost Hour Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2013
    Messages:
    22,370
    Thanks Received:
    4,338
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +25,807
    We've got one in Virginia right now.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2016
  6. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    38,523
    Thanks Received:
    8,176
    Trophy Points:
    1,370
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +15,934
    Correct, senators have 6yr terms, three times a congressional term.

    But senators do not have the power of the purse, they represent their State's interest.

    Gerrymandering is what strips us citizens of our right to elect our representation fairly, and secures the seats of our Congress critters spending all that money of ours...for a lifetime...
     
  7. Southern Dad
    Offline

    Southern Dad Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    Messages:
    127
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +145
    Back that up. If that is really your belief you should have no trouble showing us some gerrymandered districts and a career politician that is in that district serving long terms. Democrats control 9 of the 10 most gerrymandered districts in the country. Maryland ranks one of the highest in gerrymandered districts. The Democrats redrew the lines in 2012. The MD-3 is Maryland's most gerrymandered district. John Sarbanes represents it. He's been in the House since 2007. Of course, the Maryland districts were gerrymandered under the Republicans who drew the lines in 2001, as well.

    Take my challenge and back up your statement. Find a couple House seats where gerrymandering has stripped the US citizens of the right to elect representation fairly and secured the seat of a Congress critter. Are you supporting Donald J Trump? If you want term limits, he's the only one that seems on board with it.
     
  8. OldLady
    Offline

    OldLady Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    23,954
    Thanks Received:
    4,566
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +18,787
    I think term limits are a sensible idea, for this reason: Politicians are sometimes reluctant to vote on a controversial topic or to stand behind a controversial issue on one side or the other because they are worried about their re-election chances. That's why immigration reform and gun rights legislation has never gotten anywhere for decades. We can't eliminate that re-election phenom entirely, but if house and senate leaders were elected for six year terms (there is a pretty high learning curve in the first term, yes?--they are complicated issues) and limited to two terms, with a process for the electorate to take up a no-confidence vote if they became exceedingly unhappy with someone during the long term, I think that would be fair. And the second term, the leader would be less adverse to taking a risk and making a stand.
    Is that wrong?
     
  9. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    38,523
    Thanks Received:
    8,176
    Trophy Points:
    1,370
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +15,934
    Whoa Nellie! Calm down...your screeching is nearly unbearable.... we are having a discussion, or debate, and not some spitting contest, for goodness sake!

    Kay Granger for one, Sarbanes as another....

    Gerrymandering is DONE for a pure political reason....on BOTH sides of the aisle....thus the name's meaning.

    Are you actually taking the position that Gerrymandering seats in the House is not silencing the votes of citizens who normally would have a chance for their vote to actually count?

    And not keeping congress critters in seats that they probably could not keep, without the gerrymandering?
     
  10. Southern Dad
    Offline

    Southern Dad Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    Messages:
    127
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +145
    How exactly do you feel that Kay Granger has benefited from gerrymandering? The Texas 12th which she represents has had its boundaries changed in 2013. Kay held the office from 1997 - present. Prior to that it was held by two Democrats going back to 1955. Her district is now 86% urban. That really doesn't benefit Republicans. You trotted this out as an example. I'm interested how do you figure that Kay Granger has benefited from gerrymandering. She won in 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012 with one set of boundaries, then after the district changed she won in 2014. Do you contend that she would have lost in 2014 without this change to her district boundaries? She won with over 70% of the vote. As a matter of fact she has won in 2012 with 71% and 2010 with 67%.

    Go ahead explain how gerrymandering caused her to keep power. Because I think that she kept power because the voters want her to represent them.

    John Sarbanes district? The boundaries were the same from 2003 to 2013. He won in 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012 with those boundaries. They were changed in 2013 and he won again in 2014. He won with 57% of the vote in 2014. Do you think he would have lost if the district boundaries remained the same as 2012?
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

can a president impose term limits on congress

,

donald trump

,

impose term limits on congress

,

imposinf term limits on congress

,

will kay granger lose the election

,

would limiting congressional terms take a constitutional amendment