Posted on 08/21/2009 9:56:14 AM PDT by U.S.overallothers
I have been thinking back in American history. Following the two term precedent set by Washington all other Presidents, with the exception of F.D.Roosevelt, have stuck to this rule to show they were not "power hungry". We now have the 22nd Amendment to the Constitutional limiting the President to two terms.
It was Thomas Jefferson's ideology that "politicians" did not exist. It was his belief that ordinary citizens serve their fellow countrymen and return to their jobs and livelihoods (in that time farming). This principle is called republican agrarianism. For proof of Jefferson's ideals look to Virginia's short sessions for the state legislature.
My thinking is that if we limit the President's terms to prevent the hoarding of power, why not do the same thing for Senators and Representatives. Maybe we could get some fresh people in Congress uncorrupted and willing to listen to the American people. I haven't seen any articles on this subject and wanted to get a discussion started. What are your thoughts on this?
-U.S.overallothers
That's exactly the experience in California, but it's not just the legislative staffers, it's the career government services workers in the agencies who gain power as legislators come and go like a revolving door
So what does a “lobbyist” do?
Every House member is up for the people's verdict every two years.
If elections don't work, the problem is too great for term limits to resolve.
How about if your net worth is over X Million and your spouse earns over Y annually, you don’t get paid for the position either. Case in point, Kerry, Edwards, Pilosi to name a few.
LLS
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought that the constitution initially did have term limits esp for the House. Am I wrong about that?
Term limits would take the partisanship out of politics and have a forum of people who are not out there trying to get elected but who would be doing the right thing.
How would we get this done, by putting it on a referendem ballot in every state or is a state thing.
Whatever it is, it should be done.
1) I heard b frank lambast a constitueent in public and
2) Hearing my own representative, in a town hall meeting, telling us that what we want is wrong and he is going to do it his way and screw us.
The arrogance is unbelievable
I am in favor of term limits, but ones more along the lines of 10-12 terms in the House and 4 in the Senate. With maybe an upper limit of 36 years combined. All other positions in Congress(staff) have a limit of up to 15 years working for Congress. Long enough that you will have senior congressmen who work independent of Congressional staff and can give some direction to more junior Congressmen, but not so long that they just remain there permanently.
Start by getting them off the federal payroll and onto their states’ payroll.
I’ll bet that a lot of perks and bennies drop off soon.
This has been my tagline for along time
Not only term limits, but also changing the length of the Representatives’ terms with the addition of different beginnings, so that there’s never the possibility of a total change of power except over a period of time. I suggest shortening the Senate terms to five years, and lengthening Rep’s to five years, and limiting both houses to two terms.
Not really. Term limits ensures that all of these pols will eventually leave office in a reasonable amount of time. Right now, incumbents have a major advantage over newcomers in an election. Unless a representative is obviously horrendous or simply doesn't want to be there anymore, it is almost impossible to dislodge them. And as it works out, the ones that stick around the longest are usually the ones that do the most damage via legislation (or blocking good legislation).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.