Posted on 09/17/2009 8:29:25 AM PDT by cc2k
Seems like at every gathering of conservatives or self proclaimed constitutional patriots that I go to, a very popular theme is term limits. Everyone seems to agree that after spending a few years in Washington DC, even the best, most conservative, most constitutionally aware legislators go soft and are weakened by a combination of lobbyists and partisan politics. And everyone seems to have some proposed solution involving some legislation or possibly even a constitutional amendment.
Well, here’s the reality. We the voters determine who represents us in Washington, DC. We also decide who represents us in our state capitols, our county seats and even our city halls. We also elect (directly or indirectly) leaders of the executive branch in Washington DC, and in all the lower levels of government.
Term limits are possible with no changes to the current rules! All that needs to change is the behavior of the electorate.
As I value the constitution, and I wish for the Federal Congress to at least stop usurping further powers from the states and the people as a prelude to actually reducing federal involvement in areas for which there is no constitutional authority, I believe that new talent is needed in the Congress (and at state and local levels as well, I’ll be covering that later). I also recognize that it’s my duty as a citizen to truly re-evaluate the situation every two years, and to continue to seek further improvements rather than just keeping the status quo.
To move toward this goal, I make the following pledges:
A common complaint against term limits is, “What if I’m happy with the Representative I have. He or she is doing a good job for me.” My response to that is this question. Is this “good” representative the only person in your entire Congressional district who shares your views and can represent you properly? Or, in the case of the United States Senate, is this candidate the only person in your entire state who is committed to smaller government, openness and transparency, and following the constitution. If you answer yes to these questions, this country is already lost. If you think those questions are absurd, and you recognize that, of course there is at least one other person who shares these views, then it’s your duty as a citizen to seek out and find new talent, recruit them as candidates for office.
Now is the time that we should be searching for our candidates for next year. We need to prepare for this coming election cycle. The opportunity to make real changes may never be as good as it will be in 2010. Let’s make 2010 the year we send all the incumbents in Washington DC home.
Term Limits...what brought us to this discussion? How about $158,000 salaries? What about a pension that pays them much of that same salarie once out of office. Oh, and did I mention their health care?
We give candidates incentive to run for office for all the wrong reasons. Take away those reasons and flush out the statesmen..you know those ones who run to actually make a difference.
You get a pledge from a prospective candidate to reduce the salary to the median income for white males (48,000); fund their own retirements like the rest of us; and allow them the same pay-in health care coverage as any other normal Joe. If they even flinch or stall, turn the other way and walk.
The beautiful irony here is that we will NEVER find good candidates if the pay is too lucrative and the benefits to good to turn down. Ask yourself this: Who would want to serve office with what I have described? Not the greedy, that is for sure.
Representatives and Senators shall be employees of the State that they represent. Their compensation, salaries and benefits shall be set by the legislature of their state.
This does a couple of things. First, it put them out of the business of setting their own pay and benefits plans. And it moves those decisions a step closer to We The People.
But even more, it reminds them who they are supposed to be representing. It doesn’t undo the 17th amendment, but it still gives a little reminder with the paycheck or direct deposit stub that "Hey, you work for us back home."
| From the desk of cc2k: |
Now THAT is the best idea I have heard yet! So good in fact, we should pursue it! You know who that fella is? When I pass this knowledge on I want to be sure and give proper credit.
Unfortunately, excess incumbency is NOT JUST a voter problem. It is caused by LOCAL redistricting that strongly favors incumbency, and rewards longevity with increasingly friendly wards and precincts.
The only cure for that is to outlaw “Gerrymandering” - the creation of highly distorted, meandering districts that accumulate tiny pockets of support within a sea of opposition. The only mechanism I thought of would be to set a legal maximum ratio of district boundary to district area. Mathematically, the minimum would be 2xPi - about 6.284 - for an almost perfectly circular district. I don’t know what the maximum should be, but my own district is probably in triple digits.
MainFrame65 wrote:
Unfortunately, excess incumbency is NOT JUST a voter problem. It is caused by LOCAL redistricting that strongly favors incumbency, and rewards longevity with increasingly friendly wards and precincts.
I agree with you that gerrymandering is a problem. But I don’t buy that this isn’t just another problem the voters need to fix. Voters can fix that too.
Who draws the gerrymandered districts? And how do they get the authority to do that? Are they perhaps elected?
| From the desk of cc2k: |
True, we DO elect the state and local reps that do the gerrymandering, but in turn they immediately become the incumbents, whose primary interest is the next election. That is the reason that objective, enforceable, LEGAL barriers to it must be created - and the legislatures will NEVER do it for us.
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.