The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: rich_t on April 22, 2008, 10:24:48 PM
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
-
I'm undecided. I am, for the most part, for term limits. It keeps out the career politicians and entrenched generation-long majorities. But I am somewhat against them. If we institute term limits, the bureaucracy in DC gains more power because they are not limited in how long they can work behind the scenes twisting arms, wheedling, and generally being untruthful to accomplish their own goals.
I think limiting our Senators to two terms (12 years) and our Representatives to six terms (12 years) may be a good start, but that's just my cent-and-a-half.
-
I very very much support the idea of term limits. What I am undecided about is the actual number of terms.
The only issue with it is, that we'll never get a bill passed that sets it. Who in there right mind will vote to take themselves out of power?
-
I very very much support the idea of term limits. What I am undecided about is the actual number of terms.
The only issue with it is, that we'll never get a bill passed that sets it. Who in there right mind will vote to take themselves out of power?
In his last term in the Senate, Zell Miller introduced a bill to repeal the 17th Amendment, returning the power to appoint Senators to their state's Legislature. It did not fair well.
-
Thanks for the response Chris, but part of your answer is unclear to me.
If we institute term limits, the bureaucracy in DC gains more power because they are not limited in how long they can work behind the scenes twisting arms, wheedling, and generally being untruthful to accomplish their own goals.
How would term limits give the bureaucracy in DC more power?
By my way of thinking it would reduce their power, by limiting the time they have to apply it.
-
I very very much support the idea of term limits. What I am undecided about is the actual number of terms.
The only issue with it is, that we'll never get a bill passed that sets it. Who in there right mind will vote to take themselves out of power?
As far as the actual number of terms... I agree with the term limits that Chris has mentioned.
As for not getting a bill passed... I fear you are correct. Those now in power will not willingly limit the amount of time they can wield it.
But on the plus side, Article V of the Constitution does allow for an amendment even when those in Congress don't propose it:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate
No easy task to accomplish by any means, but certainly can be done if enough citizens desire it. IMO anyway.
-
Thanks for the response Chris, but part of your answer is unclear to me.
If we institute term limits, the bureaucracy in DC gains more power because they are not limited in how long they can work behind the scenes twisting arms, wheedling, and generally being untruthful to accomplish their own goals.
How would term limits give the bureaucracy in DC more power?
By my way of thinking it would reduce their power, by limiting the time they have to apply it.
I'm talking about higher-level government employees. The best friend a federal employee with an agenda can have is an inexperienced FNG from some Congressional district who's been doing something else besides working the system in DC for the last twenty or thirty years.
-
How many is "several" though?
I will admit I completely forgot about that part of the amendment process. That does breathe a bit of hope back into me on the subject.
-
Thanks for the response Chris, but part of your answer is unclear to me.
If we institute term limits, the bureaucracy in DC gains more power because they are not limited in how long they can work behind the scenes twisting arms, wheedling, and generally being untruthful to accomplish their own goals.
How would term limits give the bureaucracy in DC more power?
By my way of thinking it would reduce their power, by limiting the time they have to apply it.
I'm talking about higher-level government employees. The best friend a federal employee with an agenda can have is an inexperienced FNG from some Congressional district who's been doing something else besides working the system in DC for the last twenty or thirty years.
Ahhh... I see your point. I hadn't even thought about that aspect of it.
But I still like the concept of congressional term limits.
-
"several"= 3/4 which is 37.5 or 38 states.
-
How many is "several" though?
I will admit I completely forgot about that part of the amendment process. That does breathe a bit of hope back into me on the subject.
How many is "several"? As written, it simply means that article in question ackwowledges that there was more than one state in mind. At least that is the way view it.
-
"several"= 3/4 which is 37.5 or 38 states.
Correct.
I think it can be done.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
Then why have term limits for Presidents?
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
Then why have term limits for Presidents?
Excellent question.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
Then why have term limits for Presidents?
Excellent question.
Elections can be rigged. Theres no way to get around a limit though. Sure, you could set a puppet up to take your place afterwards, but theres nothing stopping that right now either.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
Then why have term limits for Presidents?
Excellent question.
Elections can be rigged. Theres no way to get around a limit though. Sure, you could set a puppet up to take your place afterwards, but theres nothing stopping that right now either.
Exactly.
We can do better IMO. But it will take effort.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
Yes. I am not as cynical as many here. I think people can be smart.
But the belief that people are basically stupid is.. oh wait.. that is what liberals think.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
Yes. I am not as cynical as many here. I think people can be smart.
But the belief that people are basically stupid is.. oh wait.. that is what liberals think.
It is not so much about being stupid as being selfish IMO.
Most folks vote in their own best intererst instead of voting for what is best for the country.
It has been termed as bread and circuses in the past... I find that the term still applies.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
Yes. I am not as cynical as many here. I think people can be smart.
But the belief that people are basically stupid is.. oh wait.. that is what liberals think.
It is not so much about being stupid as being selfish IMO.
Most folks vote in their own best intererst instead of voting for what what is best for the country.
It has been termed as bread and circuses in the past... I find that the term still applies.
Everyone votes in their own interests in the final analysis. The question is whether they see the Country's interest as their own. Smart people do.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
Yes. I am not as cynical as many here. I think people can be smart.
But the belief that people are basically stupid is.. oh wait.. that is what liberals think.
It is not so much about being stupid as being selfish IMO.
Most folks vote in their own best intererst instead of voting for what what is best for the country.
It has been termed as bread and circuses in the past... I find that the term still applies.
Everyone votes in their own interests in the final analysis. The question is whether they see the Country's interest as their own. Smart people do.
Smart people as recognised by whom?
Most folks don't give a shit about the good of the country. They want what they want. And the good of the country be damned.
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
Yes. I am not as cynical as many here. I think people can be smart.
But the belief that people are basically stupid is.. oh wait.. that is what liberals think.
It is not so much about being stupid as being selfish IMO.
Most folks vote in their own best intererst instead of voting for what what is best for the country.
It has been termed as bread and circuses in the past... I find that the term still applies.
Everyone votes in their own interests in the final analysis. The question is whether they see the Country's interest as their own. Smart people do.
Smart people as recognised by whom?
Most folks don't give a shit about the good of the country. They want what they want. And the good of the country be damned.
These people are called "liberals."
-
I have been pondering this question for a while, and I am leaning toward "For" term limits, but I'm not 100% locked in about it yet.
I'm interested in knowing the opinions of others here on this topic.
We have term limits. They are called "elections."
So you are against mandated congressional term limits?
Yes. I am not as cynical as many here. I think people can be smart.
But the belief that people are basically stupid is.. oh wait.. that is what liberals think.
It is not so much about being stupid as being selfish IMO.
Most folks vote in their own best intererst instead of voting for what what is best for the country.
It has been termed as bread and circuses in the past... I find that the term still applies.
Everyone votes in their own interests in the final analysis. The question is whether they see the Country's interest as their own. Smart people do.
Smart people as recognised by whom?
Most folks don't give a shit about the good of the country. They want what they want. And the good of the country be damned.
These people are called "liberals."
I am starting to wonder if you are one of them.
But even if you are, I thank you for taking part in the poll.
-
The problem with passing term limits is that it completely changes the dynamic of how Congress functions in ways that are not to any of the incumbents' clear advantage, and to the obvious disadvantage of most of them. Suppose you are one of the Senators or Reps from an out-of-the-way, not-particularly-important State or district. In a term-limited Congress, you will never acquire a prominent position as a committee head and have relatively little chance of even being seated on one of the major committees (Justice, Defense, Banking, etc.). In the current system, your longevity will eventually be rewarded in a seniority system. Where is the incentive to dump your current standing in a known system and screw yourself (and also the people you represent, for whom you will NEVER be in a position to bring home the bacon and possibly improve their relative importance in the national scheme)?
After watching Byrd, Spector, and company dither around, though, an age limit wouldn't trouble me though.
-
Totally for term limits. Fixed terms would hopefully prompt those in office to actually do something constructive with their time, eliminates the consistent campaigning, and with a change of guard at the door gives them a heightened level of awareness to party affiliation and loyalty. You want your party to retain that now open seat? then remember the constituents who put you there.
That and it will rid the country of Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Reid, Paul and the like.
-
I have favored term limits for many years. Elections do not function as term limits; election results are often purchased by the incumbent candidates.
When I argue for term limits, a common response is, "But it takes them (the politicians) more than a term to learn the system!"
To which I respond, "Thank you for making my point. There should be no damned 'system'"
-
When the courts finally acquiesced to the will of the people (which they had not for about 20 years, during which time several term-limit proposals were passed in Nebraska, by very large margins), and in 2006, the politicians had to accept the inevitable, there was much gloom-and-doom about the whole deal.
In the Nebraska legislature, for example, 24 of the 49 state senators (Nebraska has only one legislative chamber), had to retire in 2006, being replaced by political novices, many of whom had never even held a minor elective position before.
There was much gloom-and-doom about this.
At the end of the 2007 session, the governor signed the largest tax-cut bill in the history of the state, $825 million or something like that.
People new in the "system" aren't as enamoured of pet projects and pet issues as are professional politicians, also people new in the "system" don't have the buddy-buddy social connections with lobbyists and special interests, and so can cut fat out of a budget with no remorse, no hesitation, whatsoever.
This year, 2008, Nebraska gets rid of the other 25 professional politicians, meaning that in 2009, all 49 state senators will have been here only since 2007.
I think it's a good deal; of course, only time will tell, but thus far it's worked out much to the advantage of the already overburdened taxpayers.
-
I'm for term limits. The amount I'm not so sure on yet. It would cleanse D.C. of people like Vast Teddy who are long past their freshness date. You would think that elections serve as term limits but ultimately, they do not.
-
The problem with passing term limits is that it completely changes the dynamic of how Congress functions in ways that are not to any of the incumbents' clear advantage, and to the obvious disadvantage of most of them. Suppose you are one of the Senators or Reps from an out-of-the-way, not-particularly-important State or district. In a term-limited Congress, you will never acquire a prominent position as a committee head and have relatively little chance of even being seated on one of the major committees (Justice, Defense, Banking, etc.). In the current system, your longevity will eventually be rewarded in a seniority system. Where is the incentive to dump your current standing in a known system and screw yourself (and also the people you represent, for whom you will NEVER be in a position to bring home the bacon and possibly improve their relative importance in the national scheme)?
After watching Byrd, Spector, and company dither around, though, an age limit wouldn't trouble me though.
You bring up an interesting point, but IMO the idea of term limits is to benefit the public; not those in Congress.
One problem with the the current system is that these people become entrenched and totally lose touch with those that they are supposed to be representing. They in effect become elitists and seem to start to consider themselves as some sort of ruling class royalty that are above the law.
I think that 12 years is long enough to get a lot of good things done and short enough to limit the long term damage that can be caused by entrenched incumbents.
-
The problem with passing term limits is that it completely changes the dynamic of how Congress functions in ways that are not to any of the incumbents' clear advantage, and to the obvious disadvantage of most of them. Suppose you are one of the Senators or Reps from an out-of-the-way, not-particularly-important State or district. In a term-limited Congress, you will never acquire a prominent position as a committee head and have relatively little chance of even being seated on one of the major committees (Justice, Defense, Banking, etc.). In the current system, your longevity will eventually be rewarded in a seniority system. Where is the incentive to dump your current standing in a known system and screw yourself (and also the people you represent, for whom you will NEVER be in a position to bring home the bacon and possibly improve their relative importance in the national scheme)?
After watching Byrd, Spector, and company dither around, though, an age limit wouldn't trouble me though.
Simple solution, committee chairs selected by rotating lottery......
doc
-
The problem with passing term limits is that it completely changes the dynamic of how Congress functions in ways that are not to any of the incumbents' clear advantage, and to the obvious disadvantage of most of them. Suppose you are one of the Senators or Reps from an out-of-the-way, not-particularly-important State or district. In a term-limited Congress, you will never acquire a prominent position as a committee head and have relatively little chance of even being seated on one of the major committees (Justice, Defense, Banking, etc.). In the current system, your longevity will eventually be rewarded in a seniority system. Where is the incentive to dump your current standing in a known system and screw yourself (and also the people you represent, for whom you will NEVER be in a position to bring home the bacon and possibly improve their relative importance in the national scheme)?
After watching Byrd, Spector, and company dither around, though, an age limit wouldn't trouble me though.
Simple solution, committee chairs selected by rotating lottery......
doc
Excellent suggestion.