Posted on 11/28/2011 9:17:31 AM PST by Kaslin
If there was ever a case for term limits, the actions of this past week have certainly demonstrated that now is the time.
Twelve Senators and Congressmen were asked to not make budget cuts, but to simply slow down the growth rate of government.
The greatest con is that a budget increase of 10% reduced to 7% is considered a 30% reduction in growth.
The growth, however, is still 7%.
The attitude exemplified by all these politicians of both parties is one of entitlement, which explains why nobody wants to do anything that will rock their boat. Just imagine if you were an elected official.
You would be entitled to pension and healthcare benefits that are far superior to the benefits available to the very same citizens that you govern. You would be able to access inside information and buy stock based upon that information, thereby dramatically increasing your net worth.
You can buy a useless piece of land, and based upon your decision and your special committee, create actions that will make that land worth a fortune.
You can buy IPOs related to companies whose future is predicated upon your public statements and influence.
All of these things would send anyone else to jail.
As Steve Kroft on 60 Minutes said, “It not illegal, but it certainly isn’t right.”
When presented with all the benefits of nationally elected officials, why would anyone want to leave public office?
Thus, in my opinion, any decision by the twelve super committee members was not done for the benefit of this country, but simply for the twelve’s own self interests.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Any twelve people who did not have a personal vested interest would have been able to accomplish the assigned task.
Most likely, here’s what they would have done. On the revenue side, institute the jobs repatriation act which states that all corporations pay a flat 20% tax. No loopholes. There, revenue is done.
On the spending side, all increases to the federal budget frozen for the next three years, with a 3% increase to offset inflation.
There, spending is done.
The combined total of these measures would far exceed the $1.2 trillion which was sought after.
Why was this so easy?
Because the twelve members in my committee weren’t running for re-election; instead they just proposed the right thing.
Term limits, the time has come.
Also, the fact that your average congressman will become instant millionaires when elected to congress is another reason to have term limits.
Cosmic stupidity! We’ve always had term limits...its called voting. If the electorate is too stupid/lazy/apathetic to vote why do you think forced term limits will yield a better result? That and why would we trust the corrupt lot in DC now to write such a bill? Theres no substitute for being well informed and active in the political process. If you cant manage that then prepare for complete servitude.
But a term limit means a politician can only run so many times.
It is not "stupidity" to realize that some good people enter Congress, and are slowly overtaken by the dark forces. Some of the best reasons for term limits are John McCain and John Boehner. Initially probably fine folks, but they eventually became trained by the liberal media on what it takes to get good ink (and preserve seat), and then there is that whole seductive effect of power thingie.
IIRC, it was term limits that removed an uber corrupt Willie Brown from the California legislature.
.
You’re not getting this are you. Term limits mean whatever the bill’s authors define it to be. Anyway, there are more than enough corrupt pols to replace those forced to exit. Why do you think term limits will change anything? If the electorate isn’t voting or acquainting themselves w/ the issues not how is a term limit law going to change that? The problem isn;t the pols, its the electorate.
Have been advocating termlimits for decades.
reason: first half term: finding bathroom, second half: working on your projects, second term, first half: finishing or giving up on projects, second half: working on re-election, third term and future terms: making sure you stay on GRAVEY TRAIN. I think this apply to both partys most of the time
So, you’re saying term limits may cause the electorate to think about their choice when they would otherwise vote for the incumbent w/o thinking? Is that a correct reading of it?
Right. So we throw out the good guys and the bad guys so it is always fifty fifty. that way the idiots and liars never need to reform to keep control. Smart plan. /sarc
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Being a politician should not be a career. Forcing a term limit has some merit. The only downside is that good politicians may be replaced by bad ones.
Do we really have competitive congressional elections any more?
Currently 95-99% of all incumbents are re-elected every two years.
What are the reasons for this?
Immediately following their first successful election (primarily when running for an open seat) your freshman congressman is showered with attention and financial considerations from various special interests for their next re-election campaign in two years. It is virtually impossible for a challenger to raise even a fraction of the money as the incumbent and having the most money is almost always the major advantage in a political campaign.
A sitting member of Congress has a huge advantage in receiving earned media coverage. Their every vote and position is reported and their voice and face becomes saturated in the local media market.
Every ten years, during re-districting (also known as the incumbent protection process) the insiders insure that your congressman will almost always get re-elected following the gerrymandering procedure.
Yes...as you said, “We’ve always had term limits...its called voting” but how do you educate and inform the voters of the choices when you are at such a distinct disadvantage?
Don’t mean to be such a pessimist, but we can’t possibly be happy with the crop of congressmen that we have under the current operating system with almost guaranteed incumbency advantage.
At least with term limits we can reduce the amount time each of them spends at the public trough!
Yes it does, I have the feeling when I look at newt, terms limit has expired.
You’re absolutely set on getting that arrogant, lazy, lying pos occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave reelected, aren’t you?
Nothing you mentioned would be corrected by term limits. It would continue to repeat on a short time interval. Until the electorate participates nothing will change. No amt of law can make this better but only much worse. Like I said, we have term limits now in voting. However, very few are engaged enough in that process.
Unfortunately very true!
Well, then tell me how do you feel about Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum?
Really....and we apply that to the POTUS too?
Talk about stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One last comment.......You are incorrect in your first sentence. If the POTUS was NOT term limited...we would have had Clinton again. Pretty much a no brainer. To name just one.
The general public is STUPID, and will remain STUPID. They aren't "informed" nor "active" in the political process.
Most can't freeking tell you who the VP is...let alone their two Senators.
Term Limits are needed.
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.