Should Congress members have term limits?

[RodISHI]

94% of 33,453 Voters on the Facebook poll say "yes".

 

[rightwinger]

Congress does have term limits

2 years for a Congressman
6 years for a Senator

After that, they have to run all over again

 

[RodISHI]

The poll writer should have more specific such as "should congress members be limited to 2 or 3 terms". I do believe that is what the poll intended to reflect when they made the poll.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

Heres to poorly crafted and ambiguous poll questions!

And no, our representatives should not be limited in the number of terms they can serve.

 

[RodISHI]

Heres to poorly crafted and ambiguous poll questions!

And no, our representatives should not be limited in the number of terms they can serve.

I disagree with you.

John Clint Dennis (1917-2000) — also known as John Dennis — of Scott County, Mo. Born in Patton, Bollinger County, Mo., July 31, 1917. Democrat. Served in the U.S. Marine Corps during World War II; Scott County Sheriff, 1951-76; member of Missouri state senate 27th District, 1976-92. Member, Freemasons; Shriners; American Legion; Veterans of Foreign Wars; Elks. Died at Missouri Veterans Home, Cape Girardeau, Cape Girardeau County, Mo., February 15, 2000. Interment at Forest Hills Memorial Gardens, Morley, Mo.

We need something more than lifetime political crooks. Limiting the times one can serve could possibly help.

Senator John Dennis in a little cafe in Morely, MO owned by some old family friends to me in 1993, "Ah honey, all sheriffs are crooks. I know I was one for seventeen years"

 

[REVxERIK]

nope, cause then you might get rid of a guy making the area and state prosperous

 

[DiamondDave]

Yes indeed...

2 terms for a senator, 6 for a congressman.. for a total of 12 years maximum for either

 

[Oddball]

No.

They should have about 95% less power to piss away taxpayer money.

 

[ozzmdj]

No.

They should have about 95% less power to piss away taxpayer money.

I agree about less power but would have to say yes to term limits. We have it in our State and it works.

 

[jillian]

too funny watching all the purported "constitutionalists" support eviscerating the constitution.

 

[DiamondDave]

too funny watching all the purported "constitutionalists" support eviscerating the constitution.

You can love the Constitution and still wish to have an amendment for a minor change such as this... just as they amended for the term limits for the President years back

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

Limiting the times one can serve could possibly help.

Well, in a way there are already term limits in place... if a consitutency finds their representaive to be corrupt, ineffective, non representive, or for whatever reason, the constitutecy has the power come election time to vote in a new representative. Personally, I dont want to limited in my ability to elect who I feel is the best qualified candidate because hes served too many terms. Also, representatives who serve for long periods of time can develope expertise in certain areas of policy which may translate into better policy.

 

[paperview]

Should Congress members have term limits?

No. There already are term limits. It's called elections.

 

[DiamondDave]

Should Congress members have term limits?

No. There already are term limits. It's called elections.

Then do you want Presidential term limits repealed as an amendment?? After all, there ARE elections

 

[paperview]

Should Congress members have term limits?

No. There already are term limits. It's called elections.

Then do you want Presidential term limits repealed as an amendment?? After all, there ARE elections

I have no problem...if that's what people want.
This country seemed to have handled it well for some 170 years before it was passed.

I respect the constitution though, and the 23rd Amendment is the law of the land.
Doubt it would ever be repealed.

 

[DiamondDave]

Should Congress members have term limits?

No. There already are term limits. It's called elections.

Then do you want Presidential term limits repealed as an amendment?? After all, there ARE elections

I have no problem...if that's what people want.
This country seemed to have handled it well for some 170 years before it was passed.

I respect the constitution though, and the 23rd Amendment is the law of the land.
Doubt it would ever be repealed.

So you don't care either way? Or you just don't care that it is limited for Presidents? And if you respect it as you say, then why not support it for the other elected officials? If you don't care either way, then why would you make a statement standing against the call for term limits?

 

[paperview]

Then do you want Presidential term limits repealed as an amendment?? After all, there ARE elections

I have no problem...if that's what people want.
This country seemed to have handled it well for some 170 years before it was passed.

I respect the constitution though, and the 23rd Amendment is the law of the land.
Doubt it would ever be repealed.

So you don't care either way? Or you just don't care that it is limited for Presidents? And if you respect it as you say, then why not support it for the other elected officials? If you don't care either way, then why would you make a statement standing against the call for term limits?

The Supreme Court, to the best of my knowledge, has ruled Term Limits unconstitutional.

Unless there is an amendment, I agree with them. then it will be...ta-da! Constitutional.

Way it goes. I follow the constitution.

 

[DiamondDave]

I have no problem...if that's what people want.
This country seemed to have handled it well for some 170 years before it was passed.

I respect the constitution though, and the 23rd Amendment is the law of the land.
Doubt it would ever be repealed.

So you don't care either way? Or you just don't care that it is limited for Presidents? And if you respect it as you say, then why not support it for the other elected officials? If you don't care either way, then why would you make a statement standing against the call for term limits?

The Supreme Court, to the best of my knowledge, has ruled Term Limits unconstitutional.

Unless there is an amendment, I agree with them. then it will be...ta-da! Constitutional.

Way it goes. I follow the constitution.

Yet they have not repealed the amendment directly relating to term limits that exists in the constitution... more absolute BS from the supreme court...

But you did not fully answer so that I can see where your stance and original statement is coming from.... I understand that you support the law as it is and that you know there are not existing term limits, nor any amendment that has imposed term limits on congressional term limits... just trying to see where you are standing

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

Yet they have not repealed the amendment directly relating to term limits that exists in the constitution... more absolute BS from the supreme court...

Whos the "they" not repealing the amendment? Cause its not within the scope of the Supreme Courts authority to repeal anything within the Consitituion but to interpret it.

 

[DiamondDave]

Yet they have not repealed the amendment directly relating to term limits that exists in the constitution... more absolute BS from the supreme court...

Whos the "they" not repealing the amendment? Cause its not within the scope of the Supreme Courts Amendment to repeal anything within the Consitituion but to interpret it.

True nuff.. poor choice of words.. but better said as they did not declare it unconstitutional and there has been no effort to repeal the existing amendment that directly deals with term limiting