If we had term limits, where would the money go?

[Amelia]

It would go somewhere. But where?

What would the people with deep pockets do to make sure they were getting bang for their buck?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We do have term limits, they’re called elections.

Otherwise, ‘candidate specific’ campaign contributions haven’t been the sole means of political advocacy for decades – hence the political action committees (PACs).

But ultimately the responsibility rests with voters, regardless of ‘term limits,’ campaign contributions, or Citizens United.

It’s naïve to believe that top down solutions such as ‘term limits’ would work.

 

[Ragnar]

First off, term limits work just fine. See: the executive branch.

Second the problem is not the money, the money would simply go to the next batch of whores. See: both major political parties. Neither Democrats or Republicans have any integrity, and less so the longer they serve.

Perhaps the greatest benefit of term limits for Congress would be forcing legislators to live under the laws that they create.

 

[oldfart]

It would go somewhere. But where?

What would the people with deep pockets do to make sure they were getting bang for their buck?

They do what Jack Abramoff recommends; hire key staffers, especially committee staffers. New Congressmen and Senators are clueless when they get to Washington and highly reliant on the existing staffers, so term limits by increasing the percentage of new Members will inflate the value of veteran staffers. Besides it's more effective.