(Take Two - D'oh)
Some people seem to like term limits, feeling it keeps people from being "career" politicians, takes away the "incumbant advantage" from stiffling competition, lowers the amount of special interest, makes politicians focus on legislating not running for reelection, etc.
On the flip side, some seem to dislike them as it limits the peoples choices, doesn't allow people to become well versed in effectively doing the job, amongst other reasons.
What are your thoughts on term limits on the federal level and why we should / shouldn't have them.
The only term limits I am for is for the President, and I am fine with the way it currently is - 10 years.
I am against term limits for Representatives and Senators. Instead, I'd prefer age limits in which incumbents cannot be a candidate after their 62nd birthday.
The reason why I am for term limits for the President is because that office holds so much political power and is being given more political power every day. Because of the amount of power the office has, term limits are required for it so one man and one political party does not act in a dictatorial manner.
The reason why I am against term limits for Representatives and Senators is because it takes time for each of them to accrue a professionalism in that office. That is Congressmen need time to gain experience as a legislator in order to be able to effectively legislate. Having term limits will cause those Congressmen to rotate out before they get the ample experience needed to fully understand how the writing of legislation works.
Look at your average bill from Congress. They tend to be hundreds of pages long. The reason isn't because Congress wants to make overly-complicated bills for their own benefit. Rather, the reason is to ensure as much as possible that no legal loopholes exist that could be exploited or abused. Which I think is a good thing since it means that Congress is not afraid to hash out particular details so that the laws they write become exactly the laws they wanted to write.
Establishing term limits gets rid of the kind of professionalism needed to write laws for a nation as large and with as many
valid special interests as the United States has.
But we do need a mechanism for turnover. And I think that mechanism should be age limits. After all, all flag officers must retire 1 month after their 62nd birthday; this retirement must be deferred to his 64th birthday by the Secretary of Defense and it may be deferred to his 66th birthday by the President. The reason why is because the older someone gets the less they are able to keep up with the advances in technology and culture. Which means younger people need to be able to get into those positions of authority so they can use those advances in effective ways.
So I think that Senate campaigns may not have anyone over the age of 60 on the ballot at the time of an election and that House campaigns may not have anyone over the age of 64 on the ballot at the time of an election. That means no one over the age of 66 will be in Congress.
But what it also means is that these long-time incumbents have a hard limit on how long they can serve, which provides the benefits of term limits. But it also allows professional politicians time needed to accrue the experience necessary to be an effective legislator.