congressional term limits

[jpd1975]

Is the time right to limit the terms of Senators and Representatives? What gives these figures the right become professional legislatures without limit. A president can only serve 2 terms, and so should be the same for both houses of the legislature.

[Gwendl]

I think there should be congressional term limits, for two reasons. One it would lower corruption as it would give less time to make the connections. But even more importantly, it would give Congress a fresh group of people who know about the here and now and not the past. Case in point is the internet. There are very few that actually know a lot about the net, because most long time congress people didn't have it back then when they started. Yet, they legislate for it without knowing anything about it. At least if there were term limits, the current crop would at least have familiarity with it as a necessity in their campaigns.

[Prometheus]

I agree, it should be limited. Leaders with no term limits reminds me too much of royalty. The same group rules, keeping others out. Preventing this would let more people be in the position, so it would be more like the people ruling themselves, as was intended.

When you let people hold on to power so long, I think it tends to take them over.

[LRW]

I believe that there is a need for a more fundamental change in American politics than just term limits. There used to be a commercial one liner, I think it was Ford Motors, that said "Quality is job one." Well, in American politics job one is RE-ELECTION. We need our elected officials to be working on the issues facing the nation without constantly "looking over their shoulder" at how any particular vote or action is going to affect re-election chances. To accomplish this we have to totally bar our national political figures from even a single re-election.

I would propose that the offices of President, VP, senators and representatives be altered to one single 8 year term. By doing this we give the official time to work on any particular policy he or she may have proposed in their campaign and we get full time work from those we send to Washington. Wouldn't that be novel. We also avoid the "royalty syndrome" that others have written about that comes from career politicians. In addition, I believe we should prohibit those currently in office from seeking a different office during their tenure. If a senator or representative wishes to run for another office he/she must resign from the Senate or House before they can start a campaign for another office. Let's have our elected officials working for a change and not constantly campaigning.

[Clay]

I believe that there is a need for a more fundamental change in American politics than just term limits. There used to be a commercial one liner, I think it was Ford Motors, that said "Quality is job one." Well, in American politics job one is RE-ELECTION. We need our elected officials to be working on the issues facing the nation without constantly "looking over their shoulder" at how any particular vote or action is going to affect re-election chances. To accomplish this we have to totally bar our national political figures from even a single re-election.

I would propose that the offices of President, VP, senators and representatives be altered to one single 8 year term. By doing this we give the official time to work on any particular policy he or she may have proposed in their campaign and we get full time work from those we send to Washington. Wouldn't that be novel. We also avoid the "royalty syndrome" that others have written about that comes from career politicians. In addition, I believe we should prohibit those currently in office from seeking a different office during their tenure. If a senator or representative wishes to run for another office he/she must resign from the Senate or House before they can start a campaign for another office. Let's have our elected officials working for a change and not constantly campaigning.

Keep the Pres and VP at 4 years and 2 terms. 8 years of Bush? I don't think so. 8 years to get rid of a lemon Pres? Keep Reps at 2 years and 4 terms. They are very accountable to their constituents. Shorten Senate terms to 4 years and 2 terms to make Senators more accountable to their constituents. 6 years is too long for a Senator. Now a Senator spends his first 2 years keeping promises, his middle 2 years taking bribes from lobbyists and his last 2 years trying to get reelected. Put some limit on Supreme Court Justices. Serving until they die of old age is ridiculous. Run off all of the lobbyists. Put definite spending limits on Presidential campaigns with no exceptions. Select all candidates from a series of public forum debates, not from smoke filled back rooms. Get rid of the electoral college and go to the popular vote. Absolutely get rid of paperless trail voting machines. Show a photo ID when you vote.

[LRW]

The only way to get politicians to focus on the issues is to take away the focus point of re-election. The longer terms would still be subject to impeachment, censure and removal.

[Clay]

The only way to get politicians to focus on the issues is to take away the focus point of re-election. The longer terms would still be subject to impeachment, censure and removal.


There must be some other way to make politicians focus on the issues? There is that prospect of reelection that tends to make a politician do the best job in his first term so that he can run on his record for reelection. In this age of corruption there are a lot of politicians who would feel that they might as well take as much graft as they can, they've only got one shot.

Incompetence and low approval ratings would keep a politician from being reelected, but apparently won't get one impeached or removed. What effect would censure have on a one termer?

[Cattraknoff]

The only way to get politicians to focus on the issues is to take away the focus point of re-election. The longer terms would still be subject to impeachment, censure and removal.

Or they will continue making more mistakes.

What happens when they handle issues incorrectly (Bush, for instance, though he's a front-man)?

IMO you should have more of an opening for a vote of non-confidence. As currently, Bush has an approval rating less than 50% (it hit near 30% at one point), should he not lose his job? People certainly aren't approving of it, and the only ones that are happen to be hard-core republicans who cannot look beyond party lines (I'd say the same of most democrats, Bush is just the current idiot in office).