• 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!

Congressional term limits

Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?


  • Total voters
    35

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.

Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
 
Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.
Seems reasonable.

Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
Also seems reasonable.

I have no issues with either.
 
One of the big problems in our country are career politicians. I don't really see this amendment getting passed, because that would require the politicians on The Hill to think about whats best for their constituents, and not whats best for them.
 
One of the big problems in our country are career politicians. I don't really see this amendment getting passed, because that would require the politicians on The Hill to think about whats best for their constituents, and not whats best for them.

Very true. Personally I'd like it they all had one term for six years including the president. They might be more interested in doing the job than worrying about being reelected. I believe they do that in Austria or was it Switzerland?

Critics though will say that by the time a politician learns the ropes and becomes effective his term would be up.
 
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.

Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.

Yes, but I would add SCOTUS term limits also. And I wouldn't allow Grandfather clause exceptions.

Limit Congressman to 4 terms of 2 years per term.
Limit Senators to 2 terms of 6 years per term.
Limit Supreme Court Justices to 1 term of 20 years.
Leave the Presidential term limits as is.

There are those who will argue that we already have term limits - we can simply vote against the incumbent. The problem is incumbents are extremely powerful and connected once they get in office. It usually takes a scandal or a long record of incompetence for the voters to get rid of them.
 
Yes, but I would add SCOTUS term limits also. And I wouldn't allow Grandfather clause exceptions.

Limit Congressman to 4 terms of 2 years per term.

That's a lot of time wasted on campaigning and raising money when they should be working for their constituents.
 
That's a lot of time wasted on campaigning and raising money when they should be working for their constituents.


The only way to prevent that is to limit every politician to one term. Now I'm not against that, but in the case of Congressman that limits them to 2 years.
 
I would definitely support term limits. One of the biggest problems with the bloated government is that politicians get elected by promising money, whether it is to the welfare class, or to corporations/ business sectors.
 
One of the big problems in our country are career politicians. I don't really see this amendment getting passed, because that would require the politicians on The Hill to think about whats best for their constituents, and not whats best for them.

That's why there's a grandfather exemption built in. It wouldn't affect the congresspeople who would have to vote for it.
 
I oppose term limits as I feel they limit the choice of voters.
 
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.

Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
I say yes but minus the grandfather clause.
 
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.

Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.

I'm all for term limits, but would like to see a term of maybe 4 to 6 years... and then I think the above would be acceptable. I would also like to see salary caps and salary increases voted on by that individuals constituents. Put "by the people, for the people" back into practical application.
 
I oppose term limits as I feel they limit the choice of voters.

You couldn't be more wrong.

30+ year dynasties of "ruling class" incumbents who ensure that no one else can afford to campaign against them limits the choice of voters.

What did you think when they wheeled Sen. Byrd into the S.O.T.U speech tonight, drooling all over himself? Is that what W.V. deserves? No, it's their only choice b/c the Byrd campaign gets all the money.
 
There's no way it could ever be adopted by Congress without the grandfather clause.

Do you honestly think any of them would even support it with the grandfather clause in it? I would be happy with the grandfather clause in it if thats what it took to get its foot in the door and passed.
 
Last edited:
If you like how your congressman is working, keep him in, if not, kick the bum out. Thats our system. I get the term limits for the pres., but I dont get how limiting congressmen is going to change anything.
 
Do you honestly think any of them would even support it with the grandfather clause in it?

Possibly. It wouldn't personally affect them, so if they thought it was a good idea for the country they'd probably support it.
 
Throw in something to prevent ridiculous jerry-mandering too though...
 
Since this is like the 5th thread I've seen on the topic I might as well just cut&paste from my older response as to why I support term limits:

A few reasons.

One of them is specific to the legislature: a person's vote in Minnesota affects me here in Virginia, even though I do not get to vote for Minnesota's Congressional representation. Human nature is, people are going to want a powerful representative to make their state more powerful than the rest. The best way to do this is to keep voting people in office until they have a lot of seniority. Term limits would equalize the power in Congress.

Then there's the fact that incumbents have a huge advantage in elections, both in fund raising and in name-recognition. This is also true because a party wants to keep its power, and is afraid that tough primary competition will weaken their chances of keeping their hold. Places represented by the majority party have significantly higher incumbency rates than other places.
 
You oppose presidential term limits?

Yes, though not enough that I would really push to eliminate them. I don't like messing with the constitution any more than absolutely necessary.
 
Yes, though not enough that I would really push to eliminate them. I don't like messing with the constitution any more than absolutely necessary.



But you do not mind messing with it when it is something you support?
 
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?…

Term limits have the effect of transfering power from the legislators to the professional staffers.

Personally, I think people who advocate term limits hate and wish to undermine republican government.
 
Personally, I think people who advocate term limits hate and wish to undermine republican government.

Caught me red handed:roll:
 
Term limits have the effect of transfering power from the legislators to the professional staffers.

How so? Each legislator comes to town with his own staff. And if there were any staffers hanging around from some previous legislator, the new guy would be under no obligation to hire them.

Chappy said:
Personally, I think people who advocate term limits hate and wish to undermine republican government.

:roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom