Who’s Opposed to Term Limits for Congress?

[RetiredGySgt]

Term limits is a bad idea. First of all the Founding Fathers gave us the opportunity to hire and fire members of congress every two years. The "term limits" proposal presumes that voters don't have enough intelligence to replace a member of congress if they prove to be inept or corrupt.

The founding fathers didn't foresee that no one polices the politicians adequately. No one needs to serve more than two terms.
Pols need to know how the rest of us live, and what problems we need solved, instead of living in their political donor bubbles.
Medicare will be bankrupt in 2026 if not sooner.
Social Security will be insolvent in 2037 if not sooner.
The National Debt is off the fucking chart, the interest payments will be more than Defense, and for what?

They envisioned serving one or two terms then going back to work.

If they envisioned that, it would have been included
Their only comparable would have been England where those in Parliament routinely served decades

How is Congress any different, douchebag? How long has Pelosi "served?" Nadler? Schumer?

Our founders never had any reservations on how many terms someone could serve

If they did, they would have put a limit

They also never envisioned a permanent Political class. In the time of the founders one did not earn enough to remain in DC year round they served 3 to 4 months then went home to work their farms and businesses and usually were already wealthy.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Go back to 3 month sessions and not year round. Pay them 50k a year and cut staff to 3 people. Force them to obey ALL the laws, prevent them from steering contracts to their family.

Cut their pay and make sure only millionaires can serve in Congress

Cut the session to 3 months and 50k is more then enough they can work the other 9 months of the year like it used to be. By the way when we were founded guess what? Only wealthy people served anyway and most stets did not vote by the people for President the state legislature picked the delegates to the EC.

What alternative history book did you dig that out of?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Anyone oppose term limits for House and Senate members? And if so, why?

I oppose them.

I think if a person runs and gets the most votes, they should get the job.

Of course, I also support real campaign finance reform which would end the bullshit advantage that incumbents have and lead to natural term limits.

I also support real campaign finance reform which would end the bullshit advantage that incumbents have

How do you reform away the advantages an incumbent has?

By reforming our campaign finance laws to make it so there is a limit to how much $$ a candidate can spend in an election campaign. Incumbents have a huge advantage as they can use their position to fundraise.

Duh!

Incumbents have a huge advantage as they can use their position to fundraise.

Incumbents have a huge advantage as they can use their position to advertise for free.

How does LoneLaugher stand a change running against Nancy Pelosi with no campaign funds?
She can write a letter to constituents. Write a letter to the editor. Get on the Nightly News. Etc. Etc.

Incumbents have a huge advantage because they have a record to run on

congress’ approval rating is shit years after year, yet the same bums get re-elected

That's because you keep voting your turd into office while I keep my public servant in Congress, figuratively speaking of course..

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Term limits is a bad idea. First of all the Founding Fathers gave us the opportunity to hire and fire members of congress every two years. The "term limits" proposal presumes that voters don't have enough intelligence to replace a member of congress if they prove to be inept or corrupt.

The founding fathers didn't foresee that no one polices the politicians adequately. No one needs to serve more than two terms.
Pols need to know how the rest of us live, and what problems we need solved, instead of living in their political donor bubbles.
Medicare will be bankrupt in 2026 if not sooner.
Social Security will be insolvent in 2037 if not sooner.
The National Debt is off the fucking chart, the interest payments will be more than Defense, and for what?

They envisioned serving one or two terms then going back to work.

If they envisioned that, it would have been included
Their only comparable would have been England where those in Parliament routinely served decades

How is Congress any different, douchebag? How long has Pelosi "served?" Nadler? Schumer?

Our founders never had any reservations on how many terms someone could serve

If they did, they would have put a limit

They also never envisioned a permanent Political class. In the time of the founders one did not earn enough to remain in DC year round they served 3 to 4 months then went home to work their farms and businesses and usually were already wealthy.

So under your new system, only the rich could win election?

 

[CowboyTed]

We have term limits
2 years in the House and 6 in the Senate

After that, you have to start all over again

I don’t want arbitrary laws telling me who I am allowed to vote for. If I like the job he is doing representing me, I should be allowed to send him back to Washington

The problem is that the longer they are in office, the more beholden they are to lobbyists, to PAC Money, to corruption, to partisan politics, pork barrel politics...., thus losing their interest in representation of the district they were elected in.

That is why Term Limits are important to keep them bound to the representation they were elected in.

Term limits are a complete red herring...

It just transfers power from the politician to the party machine...

How about Single Transfer vote under proportional representation...

This would give you 4 or 5 new parties... More choice..

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Go back to 3 month sessions and not year round. Pay them 50k a year and cut staff to 3 people. Force them to obey ALL the laws, prevent them from steering contracts to their family.

Cut their pay and make sure only millionaires can serve in Congress

Cut the session to 3 months and 50k is more then enough they can work the other 9 months of the year like it used to be. By the way when we were founded guess what? Only wealthy people served anyway and most stets did not vote by the people for President the state legislature picked the delegates to the EC.

What alternative history book did you dig that out of?

LOL even at the start of the civil war congress only meet for a few months a year. President Lincoln used HIS authority to call up the Militia since Congress wasn't due in session for another month.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Term limits is a bad idea. First of all the Founding Fathers gave us the opportunity to hire and fire members of congress every two years. The "term limits" proposal presumes that voters don't have enough intelligence to replace a member of congress if they prove to be inept or corrupt.

The founding fathers didn't foresee that no one polices the politicians adequately. No one needs to serve more than two terms.
Pols need to know how the rest of us live, and what problems we need solved, instead of living in their political donor bubbles.
Medicare will be bankrupt in 2026 if not sooner.
Social Security will be insolvent in 2037 if not sooner.
The National Debt is off the fucking chart, the interest payments will be more than Defense, and for what?

They envisioned serving one or two terms then going back to work.

If they envisioned that, it would have been included
Their only comparable would have been England where those in Parliament routinely served decades

How is Congress any different, douchebag? How long has Pelosi "served?" Nadler? Schumer?

Our founders never had any reservations on how many terms someone could serve

If they did, they would have put a limit

They also never envisioned a permanent Political class. In the time of the founders one did not earn enough to remain in DC year round they served 3 to 4 months then went home to work their farms and businesses and usually were already wealthy.

So under your new system, only the rich could win election?

NOPE but no one would have an incentive to become a member of Congress knowing THEY would get rich.

 

[Sunsettommy]

We have term limits
2 years in the House and 6 in the Senate

After that, you have to start all over again

I don’t want arbitrary laws telling me who I am allowed to vote for. If I like the job he is doing representing me, I should be allowed to send him back to Washington

The problem is that the longer they are in office, the more beholden they are to lobbyists, to PAC Money, to corruption, to partisan politics, pork barrel politics...., thus losing their interest in representation of the district they were elected in.

That is why Term Limits are important to keep them bound to the representation they were elected in.

Term limits are a complete red herring...

It just transfers power from the politician to the party machine...

How about Single Transfer vote under proportional representation...

This would give you 4 or 5 new parties... More choice..

That makes no sense when you say it is a Red Herring since that is the TOPIC of the thread.

Who’s Opposed to Term Limits for Congress?

I do agree we can benefit from more parties, but the two main parties have stacked the rules in their favor, that is why the DOMINATE the election process.

You write: "It just transfers power from the politician to the party machine..."

Interesting statement, can you elaborate on this some more?