What is your opinion regarding term limits for members of Congress?

Question

Are you for or against them? Explain your position.

Answer 1

Politicians are like babies, they should be changed often and for the same reason!!!!!!!!

Answer 2

I am against all term limits. If a person is good enough to keep winning, why replace them with someone inexperienced who easily might not be as good? Term limits do exist, its called voting for the other candidate. Term limits denies people who like a particular candidate (the previous winner) to vote for them and that is wrong. Note also that term limits has been only a scam by Republicans to remove popular, successful Democrats from office. Many Republicans elected to congress in 1994 in that horrible election swore they would only serve for a single term or two at most, but they are still there--it was just another Republican scam, another Republican lie, and they replaced competent Democrats who had kept the country on a steady and financially solvent course for 70 years with irresponsible reckless corrupt fools who bankrupted the treasury. So NO to term limits!

Answer 3

I'm against term limits (other than regular elections).

Unless there are also term limits for lobbyists, then all that imposing legislative terms limits really does is to shift power from the legislators (who are accountable to voters) to the lobbyists (who are accountable to their own wallets).

Here's what I mean. It takes time to understand how Congress works. It also takes time to understand the complex laws we have as a 21st century industrial country.

Let's assume you are a U.S. House member. By the end of your first term, you have learned how to negotiate through the legislative process, and you've begun to understand the areas of law for your committee assignments. Basically, this means you aren't really fully "up to speed" on being a good legislator until the time you are thinking about reelection. . . . Now if you're term limited, the next person to fill your seat will have to go through the same learning curve.

In the meantime, the members of the lobby haven't changed. They already understand how things operate. . . . They have already finished their own learning curve. They have an advantage over the inexperienced legislator.

So each new Congressman or Senator is just "newbie" to be fooled and flattered until they have enough experience to give as good as they get from the Lobby. . . . Why would we want to give the lobbyists even more of an advantage than they already have?

Answer 4

Absolutely, term limits. If this new Democratic Congress and all the cob webs on their seats is not proof enough I do not know what is. We are deadlocked because there are no new idea nor new blood to promote the concerns of the constituents. It is all about political agenda & political gain. I also believe you must decline your seat if you run for any alternate office. As a conflict of interest you can not be expected to represent anyone but yourself. Who ever the next one with the most votes/second to theirs should replace them. Not the wife or an appointee. How about the peoples choice. When exactly did that go away?
12 yrs max. Enough already. Gives them two Presidents to work with then go off. That's my opinion. In Hawaii our DEM Senator and Congressman will die in their seats. Their opinions never change. They don't adapt. We can not get rid of Sparks and ole' Neil and do not think I did not personally try. Mahalo.

Answer 5

We have term limits and have had them from the very begining of our nation. It is two years for a Congressman and 6 years for a Senator. If the PEOPLE THEY REPRESENT want to give them another term than they shall have one. Elections are held at the end of the term for each. The election is how we extend or end their stay in the Congress. That is term limits.

Answer 6

to not be pedantic, yet we've term Limits. they're referred to as Elections. ensue each 2 years in Congress and each 6 years interior the Senate. the place is the term minimize, provision interior the form? Do you directly think of that the guy who's elected via a Majority, for quite a few words, gets replaced via somebody, who might desire to not in any different case win, who's greater advantageous? or purely diverse? If a Majority of united statesa. needs this as you're saying, then the place are they on voting day? perhaps we'd desire to take accountability for OUR votes, and not blame somebody else...

Answer 7

Term limits is an absolute necessity. If voting changed things, it would be illegal. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Public service is a brief civic duty, not a career.Never re-elect anybody.

Answer 8

always for them, because when congress men get comfortable they get lazy and lose sight of who's agenda's they are serving.Power is corrupting.These seats need to have fresh faces in them to help keep them honest if that is possible........