Should we have term limits for all elected officials to prevent lifetime politicians?

Question

please no bashing of the guys you dont like.

Answer 1

i think it was thomas jefferson who said there should be a total change in goverment every 6 years. way back then he was right. i think most in washington are corrupt as with the localls too. ive often tried to put myself in their place and wondered what id do if someone offered me alot of money to vote a certain way. you would have no more finacial problems, you and your family would be good for life. it happens to them all the time. it would be hard to turn down. alot would say theyed never do it, but theyve never been in that situation. the best example of how things go wrong with lifetime polititions that i can think of is ted kennedy on the ethics commitee. if that can happen, anything can happen.

Answer 2

Life long politicians gain a great deal of power and become the an essential part of the political machine.
The political machines are what puts either a Democrat or Republican in office. Without it the stranglehold these two parties have on power and monies would be in serious jeopardy.
I believe in term limits for all. Thus creating an enviorment for change with the stronger possibilities of third and fourth party government. The balance of power needs to be more distributed amongst people who are more free to act on their and their constituents beliefs.
Right now we have many issues dividing us as a nation. I firmly believe most of these issues are merely a smokescreen for the two parties to achieve the one goal they agree on, a "New World Order.". Thus we would have the Western hemisphere, Asia , and Europe to do business with.
It seems as if the United States has become one big State rather than 50 united states.
The Constitution has eroded ever so gracefully by the power hungry rich and a "New World Order" will solidify there powers and thus reduce our freedoms by having to soak up the economies of South America, Central America, Mexico, and Canada.

Answer 3

No. We have elections for that reason. If they are doing a good job, and there isn't a term limit now, why would we create one? It is very unlikely (although possible) to fix all of the elections to create a politician in a position that people don't want him in. Let's keep the ones that are doing a good job and are honest. The ones that lie, cheat and steal should be gone!

Answer 4

You know what would be fun ... if we just pulled names randomly like people get called on for jury duty....to serve for a period of say 1 year.. they could refuse of course... like they could be paid very well for the average Joe it would be excellant pay but maybe much less than we pay the politicians we elect now... Make lobbying a much more monitored activity and more restrictive.... and make the election of the president some kind of contest... that some think tank guys invent... I don't know some how it should be just plain changed to be more truly a temporary representatve of the people's position.

Answer 5

No, I know too many good legislators who have been replaced by bad ones because of term limits. There has always been term limits, its called Voting For The Other Person. Why stack the deck against competence?

Answer 6

it hasn't stopped the presidents from creating legacies...... and to some extent, lifetime politicians may not be bad. they get in with the people we all need for change to take effect. some changes take years, decades even, to take effect. a politician still in office can fight for us on matters that aren't quick fixes. he/she can keep focused on our ultimate goal. a new politician will lose sight, just because they are worried about making their name before their terms are up. now, some are corrupt and let their power warp their need to serve, but I still am naive enough to believe that most politicians genuinely mean to help us. problem is that we all have different ideas about what's the best plan to take.

Answer 7

Yes we should.

Rationale, then our elected leaders would pursue their proposed programs that got them elected more aggressively without regard to polls and would be less concern about their electability (if there is such a word).

Case and Point, Reform of Social Security and Medicare, Immigration Policy. Tax Reform, specifically a more simplified tax structure

Answer 8

No that's just silly. Maybe not everyone deserves the government they get but the majority does. If they can't vote these lifetime politicians out of office they deserve them.

Answer 9

I could positioned up an answer on your question because of the fact I observe that many human beings use the "they're all corrupt" excuse for no longer balloting. it extremely is genuine that for the time of politics, money in lots of cases speaks louder than something persons. that's with the help of the fact the regulations of the game have allowed it. yet in u . s . of america, rules can substitute. it extremely is occurring today. Corruption is in basic terms a sprint piece of our issues at present. This downward financial spiral occured because of the fact individuals offered right into a defective financial concept. We elected officers who believed the financial gadget contained some sort of magical self-balancing mechanism that could desire to function to our mutual earnings. We, the electorate, in our lack of understanding, elected the incorrect leaders, who enacted the incorrect law. we've recession. yet that nutshell synopsis substitute right into a brilliant oversimplification. easily, the mess is extremely complicated. So, in case you surely need to help u . s . of america, coach your self. learn economics, finance, historic previous, the international... Then coach your persons. greater perfect yet, run for congress. and remember to vote!

Answer 10

No, the whole point is that the people have the right to elect who they want to represent them. If they chose to elect someone over and over again, that is their choice. They must be doing something right or they wouldn't get re-elected.