Pros? Cons? Some of those people will have to be scraped from their chairs like barnacles...
2007-11-18 13:59:00 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I see no cons. The one normally brought up is that seniority in Congress is such an important factor but that would "go away". Pros are that corruption would be lessened, elections would interfere less with work, there would be a constant influx of new ideas, representatives would be more in touch with their constituents, costs would be lessened (no expectation of "retirement monies"), increased areas of expertise (ie, with more demand, people from under-represented occupations would be tapped, ie, less lawyers), pork would be harder to come by, and it goes on and on.
2007-11-18 14:29:22 · answer #1 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Term limits are designed to get fresh blood into government, which is a laudable goal. On balance I think however that term limits interfere with a person's ability to elect somebody of his choice, even if the same person is reelected multiple times. A Caveat here, the elections are really not free, because they are controlled by big business, the media ,the military and the pharma interests. A candidate who is too much outside the pale like a Socialist would never get elected , not at this point yet. Maybe some day.
2007-11-18 14:11:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I do not favor term limits on Congress. If you have a good Congressman and they are committed to doing the work to represent your state, then they should be able to serve as many terms as the people of the state wants. They still have to go through the election process at the end of each term, and if the people want that Representative or Senator to serve another term, then I do not see any problems with it.
The Negative aspects for not having term limits, is that an individual will get too comfortable with their position, and may be susceptible to bribes and corruption.
2007-11-18 14:08:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
8 years maximum, then out. Banned from being a lobbyist as well. Pay should be immediately halved (never to raise again), as well as medical benefits of Obamacare only (you passed it, enjoy it), and pensions equal to time served, not life. No exceptions. They don't like that? ... don't run. Millions of others would Love the job. Take the money out of politics and the criminals will go somewhere else, perhaps the racetrack, a casino. We now have an all but permanent "Royal" ruling class, and they sure as F_ck aren't grateful, humble, temporary "Public Servants". Right now corporations love the current set up ... Buy the greedy chump once ... OWN him/her for LIFE. They wont be able to afford to buy new ones all the time. When it isn't -all-about-them- maybe it will become all about us. Term limits is the "flea bath" our government (dog) desperately needs.
2016-05-24 03:20:01 · answer #4 · answered by georgina 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a Congressional district has a Congressman that they feel comfortable with and is doing a good job for his constituants, why should they be forced to remove that person from office because of a term limit.
One of the problems with term limites (and to be fair also one of the benefits) is that you don't get career politicians. I can remember in Oakland County, Michigan we had a GREAT Congressman named Bill Broomfield. He listened to his constituants, worked hard for Oakland County, and was one of America's most bipartisan leaders after 35 years in the House. Not all politicians are corrupt, many (on both sides of the aisle) are extremely competent and desperately try to do good. We need to vote out those are corrupt and extremely partisan...while holding on to the politicans that do good.
Besides, adding term limits will not change the corruption in politics. Instead of one corrupt politican you will start to see political blocs like the old Tamany Hall in New York City. A group of influential 'backers' will invest in a different politican every few years. Nothing will change.
2007-11-18 14:10:15 · answer #5 · answered by Downriver Dave 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Are we really going to change congress that way? Who says that the new person we get to replace the old isn't just a robot of the old?
2007-11-18 14:09:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
By all means...... Too many there Toooooo Long.
No doubt we need to clear out many of the oldsters and get some fresh blood in there
2007-11-18 14:05:36 · answer #7 · answered by SFC_Ollie 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes! One term and you are out. We do not need career politicians beholden to whomever donated the cash and pull to get them elected. All they care about is keeping their political office, not about what their constituents want.
2007-11-18 14:03:18 · answer #8 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
limit it to three, two year terms that way they can't make a career of it and act in the interest of the people, rather themselves.
2007-11-18 14:10:46 · answer #9 · answered by screw ball 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
yes. 8 years only same as the President.
2007-11-18 14:03:56 · answer #10 · answered by Mother 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋