Term limits for Congress? 22 replies

Please wait...

Oblivious

I tawt I taw a puddy tat...

50 XP

30th December 2002

0 Uploads

2,806 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

More and more lately, I'm getting sick of seeing the same blow-hard career poiticians in Congress. I'm not going to name any names, and believe me, I can think of quite a few on both sides, but I think that it is a bi-partisan problem with America that needs to be fixed.

I really think it's time for term limits. This is not a new idea, it was considered in the 90s, but has since been all but forgotten. I think in these days of growing partisan politics, it would be nice for a breath of fresh air in the political world.

Some of the common pros and cons of term limits:

With term limits would come a number of newcomers with little or no political experience. Opponents of term limits argue that such inexperience will hurt voters, as rookie legislators find it hard to navigate the bureaucracy. They say limits force out well-regarded politicians who have formed strong ties with their constituents and erode democracy by taking away voters' rights to choose their representative. The people can impose a term limit with their votes. Proponents see career politicians as the greater threat. They say careerists are so intent to stay in office that they are more likely to betray their constituents and bow to corruption. Proponents say they hope term limits will encourage newcomers to take risks and push for ethics reform. Another likely result: an increased number of elected women and minorities.

I personally would like to see members of Congress limited to 12 year terms. I get goosebumps just thinking about who that would shove out of office now. :nodding:

What do you think?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#2 13 years ago

Do you mean the Surpreme Court? Members of the senate are elected for six years, while members of the HOR are elected for two years. Thus, we have term limits.

I would like to see limits placed on the Surpreme court. Divide the court in half every 10 years, with five going up in 2010, and the other four going up in 2020 for reelection.




Oblivious

I tawt I taw a puddy tat...

50 XP

30th December 2002

0 Uploads

2,806 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

No, not the Supreme Court. They are appointed to a lifetime term, which I also don't necessarily agree with, but that's another topic.

What I'm referring to in simpler terms would be like the president, who is limited to 2 terms for a total of 8 years. Currently, a member of Congress can run for office for as long as they want. Some have been there for more than 30 years.




Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

16th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

Heck yeah...You could rule the country straight from Congres or the Supreme Court..




Inyri Forge VIP Member

[Insert User Title Here]

55 XP

15th March 2005

0 Uploads

25,940 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

Congress - Senate and House of Representatives - have term lengths, but unlike the president they can serve an unlimited number of terms. I believe perhaps this is what Oblivious is talking about.

Personally, I believe that is how change keeps from occuring. We need fresh blood in the congress, else nothing will ever change. The government needs to evolve with the times, and congress can not do that if the same stuffy politicians are elected term after term after term.




Dreadnought[DK] VIP Member

Grumpy Admin

202,715 XP

7th March 2003

0 Uploads

19,294 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

as long as an elected politician has a constituent majority, he should be allowed hold whatever seat he's been elected to.




Inyri Forge VIP Member

[Insert User Title Here]

55 XP

15th March 2005

0 Uploads

25,940 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

You're saying if 51% of the American populus wanted it, Bush should be president for life? :p

I'm sure 95% of the rest of the world would have a problem with our 51% of retarded voters...




Aeroflot

I would die without GF

169,400 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

15,205 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago

I don't want to see the same people all the time either. Just like the president has a limit to how long he can serve, so should congressmen. I agree somewhat with Dreadnought about if the person has the majority of votes, then it doesn't matter. However, we need a change every once in a while, so that way congressmen don't attain great power. That's the reason there's a limit on how long a president can stay in office. The longer a person like Bush is president, the more power he can get.




Admiral Donutz VIP Member

Wanna go Double Dutch?

735,271 XP

9th December 2003

0 Uploads

71,460 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago
'Dreadnought[DK']as long as an elected politician has a constituent majority, he should be allowed hold whatever seat he's been elected to.

Agreed, aslong as you have "full" backing (that is a majority of people supporting you) I see no reason why you should leave. If somebody does his job well why get rid off that person? Experience is a valuable thing you know.




WarHawk109

From the Austrian School

50 XP

21st July 2003

0 Uploads

2,926 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago

Inyri ForgeYou're saying if 51% of the American populus wanted it, Bush should be president for life? :p

I'm sure 95% of the rest of the world would have a problem with our 51% of retarded voters...

So foreigners should dictate who leads the nation?