• 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!

Should Their Be Term Limits?

We're having a problem with the rules apparently stacked in the favor of the incumbents. Even the founders spent lifetimes in the government, and as much as I really admire them, it eliminates the chance for fresh ideas or the ability to get rid of dead weight.

OR... it gets rid of good people who are experienced and know how to navigate the political waters. If George Washington was your Senator right now, and he was doing a great job, would you want him out because of term limits?
 
OR... it gets rid of good people who are experienced and know how to navigate the political waters. If George Washington was your Senator right now, and he was doing a great job, would you want him out because of term limits?

Yes .
 
OR... it gets rid of good people who are experienced and know how to navigate the political waters.
By having term limits and getting rid of a permanent political class, there would be no need for special navigational skills.

If George Washington was your Senator right now, and he was doing a great job, would you want him out because of term limits?
Yes.
 

Then you and I fundamentally disagree. I would want George Washington to stay on for as long as he did good work, be that 2 years, or be that 60 years.
 
By having term limits and getting rid of a permanent political class, there would be no need for special navigational skills.

Of course there would. There is ALWAYS the need to navigate political waters.


See my quote to American. We fundamentally disagree.
 
Then you and I fundamentally disagree. I would want George Washington to stay on for as long as he did good work, be that 2 years, or be that 60 years.

I guess I don't believe we have enough George Washingtons in office.
 
I guess I don't believe we have enough George Washingtons in office.

And I guess I believe that when we do have one, we need to keep them.
 
Would you support term limits for congressmen? Why or why not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, under certain conditions. I would be for a 'performance limit'. I.e. if Senator x is voted into office, and has not even tried to fulfill his/hers promises within the first term they should absolutely be up for termination, unless, of course there is no one there to challenge the seat.
A bit different with congressmen/women as they have their seat for a shorter period, if I am not mistaken. They might serve up to 2 voting cycles on the same terms as the Senators.
I also think that they should not be allowed full retirement, after just one term served. It should be a subject to performance. Seems to me that a lot of our elected officials are allowed to line their pockets at our expense whether they do their job or not. That would never jive in the private sector.
 
Would you support term limits for congressmen? Why or why not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The only problem with term limits is that we can lose valuable experience during times that experience is critical. BUT, we do need some means that puts public servants back into elected positions rather than professional politicians who make up a permanent political class. Even with term limits, it will just continue to replace itself.

What we need to do is take the money out of it:

I support a Constitutional Amendment that specifies:

1. Each senator and representative will be provided a salary sufficient to live as median Americans do in the Washington DC area plus some extra for the expense of maintaining two median range residences--one in DC and one in the home state. If they increase their salaries they must publicize that in the mainstream media and cannot receive an increase until the following election.

2. Each senator and representative will fund his/her own 401k or IRA or whatever out of his/her salary and will purchase and pay for his/her own private health insurance from whatever is available to the general public. We might provide an amount up to a specified cap as matching funds for the 401k and/or health insurance which would likely be available in the private sector, but once the senator or representative leaves office, he/she will take whatever is accumulated in the 401K and will receive no pension or other funds from the public treasury. That will end the accumulation of massive amounts of wealth at the taxpayer expense the longer the person stays in office while not prohibiting those of more limited means from running for office.

3. Except in the case of major disasters, all in the federal government--elected, appointed, or hired--are prohibited from passing any legislation, regulation, or rule or otherwise using the public treasury to benefit any person, group, private business or corporate entity, constituency, state or demographic that does not benefit all. A reasonable time for implementation will be provided to allow an orderly and humane transfer of social responsibilities to the various states.

4. All campaign funds must come from U.S. citizens living within the state the senator or representative represents. Limits on campaign contributions may be imposed by the various states for their own candidates. Political parties and super pacs or similar groups who raise funds may use them to praise, promote, or criticize specific policies, programs, and initiatives but cannot be used on behalf of or targeting any specific candidate other than in the most general way such as X, X, and X supported or voted for this program policy and X and X oppose it. That kind of thing as education to the public.

5. No member of Congress or any federal appointee or any employee may exempt himself/herself from the laws, regulations, and/or rules passed for any citizen or citizens.

6. Any person, licensed organization or entity, including those in government, has the right to sue media for putting out unsourced or unsubstantiated or deliberately distorted/erroneous information that impacts character, reputation, or livelihood. In other words, libel and slander laws will become federal law.

Do this and we will be electing honest public servants to high office again and there will be no need for term limits.
 
Last edited:
The only problem with term limits is that we can lose valuable experience during times that experience is critical. BUT, we do need some means that puts public servants back into elected positions rather than professional politicians who make up a permanent political class. Even with term limits, it will just continue to replace itself.

What we need to do is take the money out of it:

I support a Constitutional Amendment that specifies:

1. Each senator and representative will be provided a salary sufficient to live as median Americans do in the Washington DC area plus some extra for the expense of maintaining two median range residences--one in DC and one in the home state. If they increase their salaries they must publicize that in the mainstream media and cannot receive an increase until the following election.

2. Each senator and representative will fund his/her own 401k or IRA or whatever out of his/her salary and will purchase and pay for his/her own private health insurance from whatever is available to the general public. We might provide an amount up to a specified cap as matching funds for the 401k and/or health insurance which would likely be available in the private sector, but once the senator or representative leaves office, he/she will take whatever is accumulated in the 401K and will receive no pension or other funds from the public treasury. That will end the accumulation of massive amounts of wealth at the taxpayer expense the longer the person stays in office while not prohibiting those of more limited means from running for office.

3. Except in the case of major disasters, all in the federal government--elected, appointed, or hired--are prohibited from passing any legislation, regulation, or rule or otherwise using the public treasury to benefit any person, group, private business or corporate entity, constituency, state or demographic that does not benefit all. A reasonable time for implementation will be provided to allow an orderly and humane transfer of social responsibilities to the various states.

4. All campaign funds must come from U.S. citizens living within the state the senator or representative represents. Limits on campaign contributions may be imposed by the various states for their own candidates. Political parties and super pacs or similar groups who raise funds may use them to praise, promote, or criticize specific policies, programs, and initiatives but cannot be used on behalf of or targeting any specific candidate other than in the most general way such as X, X, and X supported or voted for this program policy and X and X oppose it. That kind of thing as education to the public.

5. No member of Congress or any federal appointee or any employee may exempt himself/herself from the laws, regulations, and/or rules passed for any citizen or citizens.

6. Any person, licensed organization or entity, including those in government, has the right to sue media for putting out unsourced or unsubstantiated or deliberately distorted/erroneous information that impacts character, reputation, or livelihood. In other words, libel and slander laws will become federal law.

Do this and we will be electing honest public servants to high office again and there will be no need for term limits.

Term limits have been a problem for California, and I would support any ballot initiative that repeals the term limits.
 
This answer has probably already been given, but there already ARE term limits. Representatives are elected for a term of 2 years. Senators are elected for a term of 6 years.

Yes...I know...thats not what you mean...but it is the relevant fact. Every time a representative or senator goes up for reelection, their constituents are casting their vote as to whether or not they think their elected representatives are doing a good job of representing them. If their constituents reelect them, who are you to say they cant serve?
 
The only problem with term limits is that we can lose valuable experience during times that experience is critical. BUT, we do need some means that puts public servants back into elected positions rather than professional politicians who make up a permanent political class. Even with term limits, it will just continue to replace itself.

What we need to do is take the money out of it:

I support a Constitutional Amendment that specifies:

1. Each senator and representative will be provided a salary sufficient to live as median Americans do in the Washington DC area plus some extra for the expense of maintaining two median range residences--one in DC and one in the home state. If they increase their salaries they must publicize that in the mainstream media and cannot receive an increase until the following election.

2. Each senator and representative will fund his/her own 401k or IRA or whatever out of his/her salary and will purchase and pay for his/her own private health insurance from whatever is available to the general public. We might provide an amount up to a specified cap as matching funds for the 401k and/or health insurance which would likely be available in the private sector, but once the senator or representative leaves office, he/she will take whatever is accumulated in the 401K and will receive no pension or other funds from the public treasury. That will end the accumulation of massive amounts of wealth at the taxpayer expense the longer the person stays in office while not prohibiting those of more limited means from running for office.

3. Except in the case of major disasters, all in the federal government--elected, appointed, or hired--are prohibited from passing any legislation, regulation, or rule or otherwise using the public treasury to benefit any person, group, private business or corporate entity, constituency, state or demographic that does not benefit all. A reasonable time for implementation will be provided to allow an orderly and humane transfer of social responsibilities to the various states.

4. All campaign funds must come from U.S. citizens living within the state the senator or representative represents. Limits on campaign contributions may be imposed by the various states for their own candidates. Political parties and super pacs or similar groups who raise funds may use them to praise, promote, or criticize specific policies, programs, and initiatives but cannot be used on behalf of or targeting any specific candidate other than in the most general way such as X, X, and X supported or voted for this program policy and X and X oppose it. That kind of thing as education to the public.

5. No member of Congress or any federal appointee or any employee may exempt himself/herself from the laws, regulations, and/or rules passed for any citizen or citizens.

6. Any person, licensed organization or entity, including those in government, has the right to sue media for putting out unsourced or unsubstantiated or deliberately distorted/erroneous information that impacts character, reputation, or livelihood. In other words, libel and slander laws will become federal law.

Do this and we will be electing honest public servants to high office again and there will be no need for term limits.
In addition to this I would create a watchdog organization that would review all individuals to ensure they arent profiteering off of their elected position and I would cancel all retirement payments for elected representatives.
 
Term limits have been a problem for California, and I would support any ballot initiative that repeals the term limits.

Term limits without the safeguards along the lines as I suggest in my proposed constitutional amendment will only result in a permanent political class replacing itself or whomever has the most money being able to stack the legislature with selected individuals who will advance the permanent political class and its ambitions.
 
In addition to this I would create a watchdog organization that would review all individuals to ensure they arent profiteering off of their elected position and I would cancel all retirement payments for elected representatives.

Retirement benefits would cease for ALL people in the government, elected, appointed, and/or hired if my proposed amendment was adopted. I would have no problem with a limited amount of matching funds going into federal employees 401Ks while they are employed, but there would be no pensions of any kind.

And yes, I would have no problem with a well informed/qualified citizen watchdog group with an equal number of liberals/conservative/Democrats/Republicans etc. with oversight responsibilities who would report if illegal activities/corruption is detected. We have that in a way with groups such as Judicial Watch, but unfortunately we don't have a media who will report their observations or findings unless it is politically expedient to do so. I'm still trying to figure out a constitutional remedy for that.
 
Term limits have been used by the GOP as an election cudgel in 1994 and 2010 when they were the minority party. This is another distraction from the GOP without honor ...
 
Would you support term limits for congressmen? Why or why not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No.. its the responsibility of the electorate to choose their representatives.. for good or ill.

The most influence that a citizen has is in whether to reelect someone or kick them to the curb...
 
No, I do not think there should be any term limits. It is the right of the public to elect who they wish. For better, or worse.
 
Back
Top Bottom