Lifetime politicians seem out of touch with average Americans. Wouldn't term limits for ALL political offices solve this problem?
2007-05-15 15:27:05 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Support tenurecorrupts and VOID(vote out incumbents), also consider friend of an article V convention. These organizations are trying on many fronts to restore government to the people by ridding congress of corrupt careerists. It is proven that the longer a person serves in congress the more money they waste.
It has been proven over and over that AMericans have been bought by congress with our own money. The vote has failed, simply, and look at Byrd or dollar Bill Jefferson as examples of that.
If you consider that a congressman from one district has as great an impact on my district as my own, then you have to consider that we need either smaller districts and more people in congress, or we have to have term limits to negate this heavy impact. Also keep in mind that since 1994 the republicans have six times tried to get term limits in discussion and all six of those times the DEMOCRATS killed it. SOCIALISTS(dems) want POWER and CONTROL of our country, our freedoms, our money and our lives. This is demonstrated in so many ways, thought control being one of the main ways to prove the point.
http://tenurecorrupts.com/
http://voidnow.org/
http://www.foavc.org/
take a stand on your freedom, rid congress of this disease called career politicians.
2007-05-16 00:11:35 · answer #1 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I used to think the way to do that woud be to eliminate all pensions for elected officials. They'd have to limit themselves or face poverty when they got out of office. But then, more and more multi-millionaires started running for office who don't give a darn about pensions. So, if we eliminated pensions then the only career politicians would be the very wealthy, many of whom are already out of touch with real life.
So I'm beginning to think term limits would be a good idea. They could still run for a different office, but it would be like the "up or out" system in the military or many businesses.
But we should still eliminate pensions for elected officials.
2007-05-16 10:00:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm of two minds on this. First, I agree that career politicians are totally out of touch with Mr. and Mrs. Average American. At the same time, I hate to deny voters of electing someone they like. Of course there are term limits on the presidency, so....
However, speaking practically, since any move toward this goal would have to be initiated by those in power, the chances are akin to a snowball in that toasty place.
2007-05-15 22:36:11 · answer #3 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If lifetime politicians are out of touch with average Americans, those average Americans can vote them out of office any time they want. But they don't. If you don't like the fact that the majority keeps sending these people back, that's too bad. That's democracy. We don't need term limits - we already have terms.
2007-05-15 23:26:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, that is a simplistic problem to a complex problem. Just as campaign finance reform limits people's political freedom, so would term limits. New members of elected bodies cause as many problems as old members. They are different problems, not fewer problems. And for some offices a constitutional amendment would probably be necessary.
2007-05-15 22:34:56 · answer #5 · answered by Dusty P 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think this raises an important federalism question and an even more important civics question.
I think a state should be allowed to determine whether or not their representatives in both Washington and at home serve limited or unlimited terms. Arkansas tried to do this with their U.S. Senators but the Supreme Court would not allow it.
I think the BEST solution though is for voters to be more engaged in their politics and "vote the bums out" when the people feel they are not being represented.
2007-05-15 22:32:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes I agree they should have a limit as to how long they can remain in office and in order to be elected they should be drug tested and tested at random for any illegal substances.
Also if they are on any form of legal mind altering drugs such as Prozak the public should have a right to be made aware of that.
That would be the perfect excuse to get rid of some of these lunatics that are infecting our way of life as American citizens.
2007-05-16 01:46:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I agree with you completely. We also need to stop trying to advance the North American Union as it seems to be. Start taking care of Americans and registering immigrants. Create an immigration policy that works and we will stand by. Stop watering down all the laws put in place to protect Americans and get government to stop laying over for corporate America. Yeah that's alot isn't it. Well maybe its just time for the revolution to happen.
2007-05-15 22:33:26 · answer #8 · answered by offshore_worker 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think term limits would be GREAT!!!! If the politicians didn't have to worry about getting re-elected, then 'special interest' groups wouldn't have such a hold on them.
2007-05-15 22:31:46 · answer #9 · answered by luvrats 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but that will never happen. Such laws would have to be passed by the very politicians who want to be lifetime politicians.
2007-05-15 22:31:38 · answer #10 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋