• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you support term limits for Congress?

Would you support term limits for Congress? (Details in post)


  • Total voters
    36
Why does anyone want to take away my right to vote for the Congressional representative of my choice?
 
Why does anyone want to take away my right to vote for the Congressional representative of my choice?

You can vote for anyone you want who would still be eligible to run.... no one's taking away your choice.
 
You can vote for anyone you want who would still be eligible to run.... no one's taking away your choice.

Except that you would be taking away from who could run, thus limiting choices.
 
This topic is ludicrous. The government doesn't give you the power to vote for term limits...and they won't ask you to put it to a vote. :roll: You already have the power if you are a registered voters. But that's the problem isn't it. Partisans want and expect their parties to tell them what to do or what they can do. That's sheeple thinking.

In the old America people had ball and they told the government what to do.

Do you want term limits? Vote the bastards out! I never vote for the incumbent after two terms. Screw 'em.
 
Except that you would be taking away from who could run, thus limiting choices.

Age, health, and the will to serve also takes away who could or would run. :shrug:
 
Age, health, and the will to serve also takes away who could or would run. :shrug:

All of which are normal ways of a person leaving a job. Having some people say that they are too lazy or incapable of voting them out so they should just leave is not a normal way of leaving a job. It is an artificial limit to choice.
 
Absolutely not. I should be able to vote for who I choose, regardless of how long he has served in office. Telling me I can't vote for an effective legislator because he has been around for 6 whole years is a terrible idea.

Here is a silly idea: don't like a politician, vote them out.

This is where my problem comes in. On the one hand I do believe we are doing the country a disservice by having people in office for 30 years. They become completely seperated from reality.

On the other hand, I have no business telling others who they can vote for or not.
 
You can vote for anyone you want who would still be eligible to run.... no one's taking away your choice.

That is obvious BS. When you restrict who I want to vote for, you effectively take away my right to vote for who I want to vote for.

Why would you want to do that........ I ask for the third time.
 
If this were coupled with no jobs in any industry in which the congress person was a committee member on for life, then yes.

Otherwise, what is the point? Bribery will still happen.

How about we put them on criminal trial after the way Sparta used to to do to its kings?
 
I don't have a problem with it. The bitch about democracy is that it's not intellectually honest, due to the fact that anyone with a double digit IQ can vote. If the people of a certain district want a specific politician to represent them for life, they should have that right. Congressmen are essentially trapped at the whims of their constituants.
 
Yes, I support term limits - I think presidential limits and Congressional limits should match (2 of 4) . . . just alternate the years they rotate out.

The way the government is running right now, I believe the Constitution should be amended so everyone has a term of four years. Supremes get a term of 15 years and then have to be reappointed/confirmed. No more lifetime appointments.
 
I would support term limits for the Senate IF they were restored to being chosen by the State legislatures, I do not feel that the House members should be term limited as that body is elected more often and can better represent the changing whims of popular faction and opinion which by itself makes for its own self regulating term limits.
 
No way. It's a job like any other. You do well, you keep your job (keep getting voted in). You do poorly, you get fired (get voted out). If I am doing a good job, why should I be told, "well, you've had the job long enough. We are going to let you go. Doesn't matter whether you were good or not." No. Use your right to vote to put in office who you want. That's why it's there. Asking for term limits is flat out lazy, IMO.
 
Question:

A 2012 Presidential candidate (could be (R) or (D)) during the general election campaign and says they will push for and institute Congressional term limits:



House of Representatives: No more than 6 consecutive terms and not more than 10 total terms per person (20 years total)

Senate: No more than 2 consecutive terms and not more than 3 total terms per person (18 years total)

No.

I do not support term limits. The reason why I do not support term limits is because it can take some time for our politicians to become experts in their field. What I mean by that is that it can take some time for politcians to understand how legislation affects things such as agriculture, the economy, defense policy, etc.

Also, Congressmen who become such experts form the pool from which the President can recruit to the executive. That is the Chairman or Ranking Member of the House Armed Services Committee is a prime candidate for being appointed as Secretary of Defense.

Such experience can only come from being in these positions in the long term. By having Congressmen and Senators serve for extended terms and then have them sit on the same House and Senate committees, we "professionalize" our political leadership and allow them to gain expertise in certain spheres of knowledge and law.

So no, I don't think term limits are a good idea.

However, what I am in favor of is age limits. I think that once Congressmen and Senators get older they get more and more out of touch with society as it currently is rather than how it used to be. They become less connected with their constituents and more reliant on the lesser number of lobbyists that they may be more personable with.

So I would have mandatory age limits, stating that nobody can run for Congress or for the Senate after their 66th birthday, the same age in which 1-star flag officers are required to retire.

That seems more fairer to me.
 
Yes.
"Politicans and diapers need to be changed often for the same reason"
This is one of my main stances concerning politics
 
How about we put them on criminal trial after the way Sparta used to to do to its kings?

One fictional government system I had heard of was that people would nominate another to elected office, once that person is nominated, they are put into custody, and if elected, all of their assets would be frozen. If economic metrics improved by x%, so would their assets, if it went down by x% so did their assets.

If they accepted any sort of bribery, all of their stuff was forfeit.

Not advocating, but it would be interesting to see in practice.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom