Voters are too stupid not to keep reelecting pieces of crap every 2 years so I think we do need term limits.
Staffers should be limited too to prevent “power behind the throne” situations as Fieldmarshaldj has suggested.
I wouldn’t favor a 3 term limit for the House or anything like that but I’m sick and tired of the “lifers” in both chambers.
I think that it is patronizing to voters to tell them “we won’t let you vote to reelect your representative, for your own good.” If someone is doing a good job representing you in the legislature, why should I be prevented from reelecting him and forced to elect someone second-best (or have a liberal elected because the best exponent of conservative principles is barred from running despite not having any legal or ethical violations? And do you think that term limits have improved the quality of legislators and reduced electoral politicking in states like California or Florida (where politicians are constantly running for new office due to term limits? I’m all for reducing the advantage of incumbency by reining in government, getting rid of the seniority system for chairmanships, eliminating limits on campaign contributions, limiting the amount of public money that legislators can use for “meetings with constituents” and “informative mailers,” charging campaigns for a portion of legislative staffers’ salaries if they also do campaign work, etc. But I can’t countenance anyone telling me that I can’t reelect someone who is doing a good job in office, just like I won’t abide someone forcing me to change barbers or brokers because “they’ve been serving you for too long.”
I think that it is patronizing to voters to tell them “we won’t let you vote to reelect your representative, for your own good.” If someone is doing a good job representing you in the legislature, why should I be prevented from reelecting him and forced to elect someone second-best (or have a liberal elected because the best exponent of conservative principles is barred from running despite not having any legal or ethical violations? And do you think that term limits have improved the quality of legislators and reduced electoral politicking in states like California or Florida (where politicians are constantly running for new office due to term limits? I’m all for reducing the advantage of incumbency by reining in government, getting rid of the seniority system for chairmanships, eliminating limits on campaign contributions, limiting the amount of public money that legislators can use for “meetings with constituents” and “informative mailers,” charging campaigns for a portion of legislative staffers’ salaries if they also do campaign work, etc. But I can’t countenance anyone telling me that I can’t reelect someone who is doing a good job in office, just like I won’t abide someone forcing me to change barbers or brokers because “they’ve been serving you for too long.”