Voters can IMPOSE term limits

[Tech_Esq]

However, when you look at funding rates for incumbents versus challengers, then add in Congressional perks like franking and town hall meetings, you really have to question whether it's because people really LIKE the incumbent over the challenger or the incumbent can put on a better marketing campaign to get re-elected.

At the time I did my research, 25% of all incumbents ran unopposed in the House. (Not the same ones every year of course). A majority either were unopposed or had weak competition (underfunded for running a serious race). The upshot was that there was a fairly small minority of races that were competitive based on tangibles money, recognition etc.

The really amazing thing is that challengers ever beat incumbents.

I think it's mostly about positions... most politicians are pretty careful to represent their district's positions. They lose their seats when either they don't listen or they do something that ticks off their constituency.

And Tip O'Neill knew what he was talking about when he said "all politics are local".

Either way, I don't want anyone else artificially controlling my vote.

Sometimes it's about positions. Most districts have been gerrymandered such that they are not party competitive. So, in most places you are only going to get a either a democrat or a republican. (I didn't say that very well. One or the other but not a competition between the two). In that case, the challenger would have to win a primary battle to change a seat.

I will grant you that on issues of local concern, there may not be much difference no matter who or which party has the seat. In that Thomas P. O'Neill was absolutely correct. That being said, representatives vote party line 85% of the time or more. (I was actually shocked when I saw how consistent this was over time). The whip may let you out now and again, but you go off the reservation at your peril.

Lastly, if I were to pass a law that said no representative could serve more than 12 terms (24 years) that would still be too limited for you? Could it be true that out of 640,000 people in your district, only that one is fit to be its representative?

 

[nels96]

Hey Navy and Tech
Why is it that on these boards the responders never focus on the main point of the original post? Which was "Voters can Impose term Limits" and which is the ONLY way us voters can get it.

Too many voters don't realize that our country is slowly but surely going down the drain, and they only vote for their party, or their issue, or their guy. Nobody is voting for our country, America.

 

[Navy1960]

Hey Navy and Tech
Why is it that on these boards the responders never focus on the main point of the original post? Which was "Voters can Impose term Limits" and which is the ONLY way us voters can get it.

Too many voters don't realize that our country is slowly but surely going down the drain, and they only vote for their party, or their issue, or their guy. Nobody is voting for our country, America.

Well nels, threads tend to take on a life of their own once started, I've seen a thread about coal turn into a conversation about Air Force Tanker Purchasing. As to your point that voters can impose term limits, well thats true, but as you can see with the current tenure of most in congress, that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

me...

Term limits is the stupidest fucking thing to come down the pike in ages. Go ahead---impose term limits on your congressmen and congresswomen and watch who gets federal aid because of knowledge of the system and seniority.

Go back to kindergarten you fucking tool. [/

Next time you open that hole under your nose and apply it to a thread in which you obviously know nothing about and then neg rep me because your having a little temper tantrum, I suggest you read first, act like and adult second, and respect yourself and others third. Otherwise, I have no use for children that have nothing to offer.

so now you've proved yet again that you like the sound of your own voice scrambling around in your head for validation.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Hey Navy and Tech
Why is it that on these boards the responders never focus on the main point of the original post? Which was "Voters can Impose term Limits" and which is the ONLY way us voters can get it.

Too many voters don't realize that our country is slowly but surely going down the drain, and they only vote for their party, or their issue, or their guy. Nobody is voting for our country, America.

Sorry Nels, but in my experience and research, voters will never "term limit" any group. On a rare occasion, the will, borne of frustration and anger, "throw the bums out." They will never do it year in and year out. So given that, we discussed something that might actually be done.

 

[JBeukema]

Sorry Nels, but in my experience and research, voters will never "term limit" any group. On a rare occasion, the will, borne of frustration and anger, "throw the bums out." They will never do it year in and year out. .

Very well put

 

[nels96]

In effect, you are saying that, given the 95% reelection rate continuing, we might as well resign ourselves to a dictatorship of the Congress. Which I believe is a guarantee of eventual revolution.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over lousy fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world’s great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years...”
(Alexander Fraser Tytler, Cycle of Democracy 1770)

 

[Ozzimo]

It seems to me you folks have a bigger problem with elections than you do with politicians. it was said in this thread that one can't distinguish a "good candidate" from a well marketed one. That's entirely fair. But you could also argue that from a grassroots standpoint the more popular candidate will get more money to use on their marketing. You know what the best source of information is for the candidates is? (at least where I live) Its the voters pamphlet put out by the election commission. It states plainly who each candidate is, what their qualifications and education are and where they stand on certain issues (if they choose to take a stance) For initiatives it gives space for a "for" argument and an "against" argument as well as noting who wrote the arguments on behalf of what groups.

Sunlight continues to be the best disinfectant.