Make the case for term limits

Tinkerpeach said:
I would like those who believe in term limits to please explain the reasoning behind this.

If I have a representative in congress that is doing a great job why should he be forced out for someone who very well may be much worse for no other reason then he has spent a certain amount of time in his position.

As in all jobs, the more a person works at it the better they usually get generally so if I have a seasoned representative with a proven track record of positive accomplishments why should I be forced to pick a lesser experienced person to represent my interests in congress?

People often associate lengthy stays in congress with negative outcomes but oftentimes it is the opposite that happens.

Experienced representatives learn how the system works, they develop allies, and generally know how to get beneficial legislation passed much more easily than a person just entering into politics.

So please explain the reasoning why some of you want to force good people out of congress for no reason.
Click to expand...

Being a senator, congressman or supreme court justice should not be a lifetime job?!! This country is retrogressing under these career politicians?!! Times change and you need people who can change with the times and want to see progress, not keeping the status quo?!!
 
archives said:
Don’t know about the studies, nor denying them, but on local levels, Mayor and whatever legislative body, in many States to include Governors, term limits are usually the norm, and it seems to work even the expected hiccups at the offset due to inexperience
Click to expand...

You are right. I was surprised to find 36 states have term limits for governor. I don't know the effects of those laws but I'm sure there are studies--comparative state politics is interesting because you can find the consequences of different state laws--who appoints judges, term limits, policy differences...
 
Flash said:
Founders probably did not think of these positions as permanent, but look how many years people like Adams, Jefferson, and Washington spent in government positions.
Click to expand...

The Founders never wanted politics to be a full time job for anyone for many of the reasons i touch upon above.


...Our Founding Fathers envisioned that being a member of Congress would be a part-time job. Pennsylvania’s state constitution even had a provision calling for members of the Legislature to “have some profession, calling, trade, or farm, whereby he may honestly subsist.” Otherwise, they feared legislators would come to rely on politics as a career, and they would be unable to “preserve [their] independence.” ...

cite
Click to expand...
 
Tinkerpeach said:
I would like those who believe in term limits to please explain the reasoning behind this.

If I have a representative in congress that is doing a great job why should he be forced out for someone who very well may be much worse for no other reason then he has spent a certain amount of time in his position.

As in all jobs, the more a person works at it the better they usually get generally so if I have a seasoned representative with a proven track record of positive accomplishments why should I be forced to pick a lesser experienced person to represent my interests in congress?

People often associate lengthy stays in congress with negative outcomes but oftentimes it is the opposite that happens.

Experienced representatives learn how the system works, they develop allies, and generally know how to get beneficial legislation passed much more easily than a person just entering into politics.

So please explain the reasoning why some of you want to force good people out of congress for no reason.
Click to expand...

the main reasoning is that career politicians go completely against what the founders envisioned for a free state. As time went on, people realized they could get wealthy beyond imagination by being politicians.......thus the loss of freedom as the founders knew it.
 
Damocles said:
One can still be a "career public servant" working within term limits, they just would have to win election to more than one position. For instance, AOC will likely be a career politician but will also never be other than the representative of a single district for an entire career, with term limits AOC would have to appeal to more than the one district, to become a better "public servant", or she would have to go backwards in office to smaller offices within that district.
Click to expand...

As a side note, strong possibility she will at some point run for Senator, perhaps when Schumer retires, not saying she would win, but enter the race. She could also run for Mayor, again not saying she would win, rather enter the race, Mayor of NYC is more powerful and recognizable than a U.S. Congressman, opps, Congresswomen
 
NiftyNiblick said:
It's like the corporate ladder?
Keep going up until you get to a job that you can't do
and then either get let go
or continue to fuck up until you retire?

I believe in people who are good at something
sticking with it
for as long as they retain their enthusiasm for it.

We do have elections. In a democratic republic, we get the government we deserve,
so our general electorate are the ones with the most explaining to do.
Blaming the politicians before ourselves doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...

Well, not really corporate ladder, but similar, and, as has been pointed out above, some of those in office are so entrenched due to gerrymandering and money that the election isn’t really an election
 
signalmankenneth said:
Being a senator, congressman or supreme court justice should not be a lifetime job?!! This country is retrogressing under these career politicians?!! Times change and you need people who can change with the times and want to see progress, not keeping the status quo?!!
Click to expand...

Interesting point, times do change, and often those entrenched don’t, but on the flip side, often experience is what is needed during times of rapid change
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the main reasoning is that career politicians go completely against what the founders envisioned for a free state. As time went on, people realized they could get wealthy beyond imagination by being politicians.......thus the loss of freedom as the founders knew it.
Click to expand...

True, but again as has been said above, many of those very same Founders did make a career out of politics
 
archives said:
Personally, I would recommend three year limits on Senators, 18 years enough, and four, not two, year terms for House representatives with a maximum of four terms, after 12 years the local guy should move up or out.
Click to expand...

The average length of terms for the 118th Congress (2023) is:
8.5 years for House members
11.2 years for Senate
 
archives said:
Yeah, but that is the average, what do you think the median age, bet you it is higher
Click to expand...

The median age is increasing at 64.8 for senators and 58.9 for representatives. While some members serve for many years there is also a lot of turnover. In 2022 70% of representatives and 63% of senators held their office less than 12 years. 11% of senators and 10% of representatives served longer than 24 years.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-r...seats-typically-change-hands-more-frequently/

https://crsreports.congress.gov/pro...beginning,118th and three previous Congresses.
 
Flash said:
Most people do not even know the names of their elected officials and can't name how they voted on a single issue. This is true with or without term limits.

Studies of state legislatures that passed term limits found that it increased the power of interest groups and staff because the member was less experienced in legislative affairs.
Click to expand...

Those are the downsides to term limits. Established politicians are far less likely to be lobbied or coerced than fresh politicians who do not know the ropes yet.

Take Nancy Pelosi, she is far less likely to be persuaded by outside influences because she is so well established that everyone knows it would be pointless to even try.

She has her interests and is firmly committed to them and everyone knows what they are. A constant rotation of new politicians is going to make our government far more corrupt.
 
signalmankenneth said:
Being a senator, congressman or supreme court justice should not be a lifetime job?!! This country is retrogressing under these career politicians?!! Times change and you need people who can change with the times and want to see progress, not keeping the status quo?!!
Click to expand...

And what makes you think incoming politicians are going to be better than what’s there already?

Do you have any guarantees of that?

Of course you don’t. It makes no sense to throw out a very capable politician who is doing a great job to replace him with somebody you know nothing about.

There are many very good and respected career politicians in the US.
 
Any job takes time to learn the ins and outs. A politician has a lot to learn when they get in. If you think they are doing a good job, you should be able to vote them back in. If they are doing badly, vote them out. That is very short term limits.
Why do some people want the law to save them from themselves? Stop me or I will vote for him again. You should have the right to vote for them if you want to as long as you want to.
 
Nordberg said:
Any job takes time to learn the ins and outs. A politician has a lot to learn when they get in. If you think they are doing a good job, you should be able to vote them back in. If they are doing badly, vote them out. That is very short term limits.
Why do some people want the law to save them from themselves? Stop me or I will vote for him again. You should have the right to vote for them if you want to as long as you want to.
Click to expand...

Very well stated.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
I would like those who believe in term limits to please explain the reasoning behind this.

If I have a representative in congress that is doing a great job why should he be forced out for someone who very well may be much worse for no other reason then he has spent a certain amount of time in his position.

As in all jobs, the more a person works at it the better they usually get generally so if I have a seasoned representative with a proven track record of positive accomplishments why should I be forced to pick a lesser experienced person to represent my interests in congress?

People often associate lengthy stays in congress with negative outcomes but oftentimes it is the opposite that happens.

Experienced representatives learn how the system works, they develop allies, and generally know how to get beneficial legislation passed much more easily than a person just entering into politics.

So please explain the reasoning why some of you want to force good people out of congress for no reason.
Click to expand...

Term limits should only exist for Republicans. They can't govern, are always corrupt and are stricken with power drunkenness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top