Should members of Congress have term limts?

Question

why or why not?

Answer 1

absolutely.because they get too comfy with their status and get too powerful as time passes.I think senators should be limited to 1 term(6 years is enough) and representatives 3 terms(again 6 years is enough) That way we always have fresh ideas and fresh faces.When one person is in there too long it is like they become an immovable fixture that is nearly impossible to unseat.I think we would have higher voter turnout too if there wer more fresh faces and fresh ideas.More of the same old crap makes people apathetic and that is because they feel that no matter how they vote,MR or MS incumbent for life is gonna win anyway so why bother.

Answer 2

Very good question. I think that both the senate and congress, as well as the president should all have term limits. All should be 4 terms. 4 Terms covers a generation, which is all any public figure should be allowed. The 4 terms would cover both time in the senate and congress, but would not cover presidential time. So, a congressman could serve 2 terms and then go on to serve 2 terms in the senate if they so desire. A person could serve 4 terms total in the senate and congress, and then another 4 terms as president, if popular enough. Politicians should be from the people, and not a career path.

Answer 3

No, because unlike the president, congressmen (and women) do not have a cabinet to help set policy and update them on situations. Members of congress often learn from more senior members how the "game" works, and the knowledge is passed on in that regard. If there were term limits, then there would by default never be any senior members of congress, and that branch of the government would be less effective.

Answer 4

Yes! yes! yes!! when the politicans make a career of being in office they soon forget how to put the people first and what is best for the country instead of who is giving them the most money and then voting for their interest instead of what the people what and need to make their lives better. they lose sight of what is important. they should not be paid what they are being paid now and the benafits should not continue after they leave office.. I also feel that having military service should be required and have some knowledge of just how the world works for the common people. term limits in the senate should be no more that 2 terms and house 3 terms. The President should not have secret service after they leave office for no longer that 6 years. they should have to buy their health insurance the same as the people have to and that goes for the congress. They should be paid for what they accomplish. which seems to be little. they are worried about being re-elected not the people...

Answer 5

Congressmen have a 98% re-election rate so would (if didn't die and wanted to) stay in office for expected time 100 years.
This is due to gerrymandering, franking privilege abuse, and experience and fundraising advantages.

Term limits would stop the "permanent congressman" problem but
would also eliminate the congressmen that are permanent because they are GOOD. There are certain ones that are clearly head and shoulders above the rest in terms of ability, as anybody who watches congress a lot on CSPAN can tell.

So I think it would be better to get rid of gerrymandering and
get a better voting system. See
http://rangevoting.org/GerryExamples.html
and
http://RangeVoting.org

Answer 6

They already do-it is called elections. Every 2 or 6 years depending if serving in the house or senate. If an elected member of congress doesn't do the job as expected by their supporters, they aren't re-elected.

Answer 7

No, people have the right to re-elect a representative for as long as they want (in Britain Winston Churchill had been an MP 40 years before he became prime minister and saved the nation during WW2). You have identified a real problem but not the right solution. A better reform would be to remove political influence in redistricting so that electoral boundaries are not rigged to enable to incumbents to stay in office forever. This could make it easier for voters to throw out politicians past their best-before dates, but still allow people to keep re-electing someone who deserves it.

Answer 8

Yes. The reasons are obvious - the longer a Congressperson is in office, the more "inside the beltway" they think and act. We need regular people to go to Congress and make laws for regular people.

A related thought: people say they don't want "career politicians" but then they only vote for the candidate with "experience" - what's up with that?

Answer 9

Yes, I believe that ALL people elected to ANY office should have term limits. Too long in office leads to coruption and the good ol' boy syndrome. Re-elect NO ONE to ANY office! That's what I say.

Along those lines would also be an accoutability for promises that were made in their campaign. If they do not keep their promises, out they go!

Too many times we see how those in public office become out of touch with the people that elected them and pander to those that give them money in return for special consideration in one form or another.

Answer 10

Of course they should it wasn't ever set up to be a lifetime job. But we have voted over theyears countless times to have term limits and it was approved by the voters.
Yet because most Congressmen are lawyers these 'legalities' are hopelessly tied up in courts. so much for majority rules.