Skip to main content

Im just wondering what your thoughts are about term limits.  I do not at all believe seeing the same faces over and over again accomplishes anything.  Fresh blood, new ideas and new faces is what pushes us forward.  

Pelosi, Reid, Boehner, Ryan, etc...the whole Congressional gang...should have been out a long time ago.  No man or woman should have a career in Congress.  They should serve for a period of time and then go back to their old profession.   Most certainly, no person should serve their entire life in Congress until they die.  

Vote in poll please...

2:52 AM PT: Could someone post a petition to change,org or the White House petition website?


Poll

Should Congress people have term limits?

63%57 votes
36%33 votes

| 90 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  no (17+ / 0-)

    it denies people the chance to choose their representatives. it also further empowers lobbyists, who can be there forever, while the congresscritters are termed out just as they're learning how the game is played. it also denies us the wisdom of experience.

    the way to fix the broken system is campaign finance reform and lobbying reform. we need better representation, but when we find it we need to hang onto it.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:15:01 AM PST

  •  Congress DOES have term limits. (14+ / 0-)

    They're called, "elections."

    "Everything I do is blown out of proportion. It really hurts my feelings." - Paris Hilton

    by kestrel9000 on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:15:02 AM PST

    •  We could get a pool or side bet going... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kestrel9000

      ...on how many respond to the question with EXACTLY the same response...

      "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

      by leftykook on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:37:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Gerrymander (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Buckeye54

      makes elections a safe game in many districts. They are more threaten by primaries.

      I would like to see long terms but terms: in Senate 4 in the House 8 in Supreme Court 25 years.

      •  Then let's get rid of the gerrymander... (5+ / 0-)

        ...or, better yet, triple the size of the House so that it's harder to gerrymander.

        If the problem is safe seats due to gerrymandering, the solution is to make them unsafeā€”not to implement undemocratic solutions like term limits.

        "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

        by JamesGG on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 05:34:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Undemocratic? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mannie

          What is undemocratic about term limits?  Democracy was indeed born with term limits in Athens and in Rome.

          Double the House representatives? No thanks, that will be a total waste. I agree with a gerrymander fix but i still would like to see term limits.

          •  If the people are satisfied... (4+ / 0-)

            ...with the job their representative is doing, term limits prevent their will from being expressed by disqualifying that representative from reelection.

            That is undemocratic, as it denies the will of the people.

            Fix gerrymandering, make the House bigger so that it's easier for people to unseat a representative they don't like, and representatives will be in Congress only for as long as they enjoy the support of the people they represent.

            "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

            by JamesGG on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 06:08:39 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The "will of the people" (0+ / 0-)

              is not an absolute value in democracies. I the people wanted to elect a 12 year old president should that be fine? If they want a foreigner as president should that be fine? If they want to elect a guy who lives in Alaska to represent them in FL even though he has never set foot in FL is that Ok? Is the Presidential term limit undemocratic?

              All of that not to mention hat the will of the people is malleable and can be guided, particularly in modern times with mass media

              •  This isn't about those things, though. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JesseCW

                It's not about a 12-year-old or a foreign citizen as president. Those limits make sense, in keeping out people who are not qualified to represent the people in their government.

                This is about getting rid of someone who has already met the qualifications for a representative and who is doing a good job as a representative according to the only standard that actually matters: the satisfaction of the people he or she represents.

                I do also think the presidency is different in such a way as to justify term limits, as the amount of institutional and rhetorical power possessed by the President is such that 2+-term incumbency would be an almost-insurmountable advantage. That amount of power simply doesn't exist for one representative among 435 (or more, to my preference), or even for one senator among 100.

                "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

                by JamesGG on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 06:58:07 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I am not entirely convinced that Term Limits (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  SanFernandoValleyMom

                  were a good idea for the Presidency, either.

                  They were enacted to prevent another FDR.

                  I don't want to prevent another FDR.

                  "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

                  by JesseCW on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 07:01:56 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  What about (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    SanFernandoValleyMom

                    a Reagan with 8 terms?

                    •  Reagan was having trouble with his own (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      SanFernandoValleyMom

                      name by the end of his second term.  He couldn't have managed another campaign.

                      Even were that not the case, I don't think he'd have been any stronger by 1992 than Bush was - and Bush was basically Reagan's third term.

                      Without Presidential term limits, the only change may have been a third Clinton run in 2000.  

                      Ike was too old and sick, LBJ didn't run again for other reasons, ect.

                      "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

                      by JesseCW on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 07:59:10 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Presidential term limits have never helped us (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Odysseus, JesseCW

                    Going through the list of post-FDR presidents, only Reagan and Clinton served two complete terms and could still have theoretically been elected to a third.  All of the others either died in office, resigned amid scandal, lost re-election badly, or left office so unpopular that they could never have won another election.

                    And I'm not so sure Reagan wins the 1988 election.  He was 77 and was already suffering from Alzheimer's.  Some kind of hypothetical Reaganbot who looked and talked like Reagan without aging might have won multiple terms, but that's not what we're discussing.

                    Really, the 22nd Amendment has kept us from re-electing Bill Clinton again, when he totally could have won in any of the post-1996 elections, and it will do the same to keep a young and healthy Obama from serving a third term.  That's about it.

  •  We have term limits... (9+ / 0-)

    ....they're called "elections"....

    "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

    by leftykook on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:19:03 AM PST

  •  no (4+ / 0-)
    Could someone post a petition to change,org or the White House petition website?
    again, no.

    next question?

    Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

    by Cedwyn on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:22:36 AM PST

  •  I used to think term limits were a great idea. (11+ / 0-)

    I even voted to make them law in California.

    It was massive mistake.

    All term limited politicians do in their last allowable term is try to please the right economic interest so they can have a "consultant" job after their term is over.

    I'd much rather have them worried about how to keep winning voters to their side than worried about how to please some developers or some oil company so they can get hired in return for a vote.

    "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

    by JesseCW on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:26:58 AM PST

  •  Bet this was inspired by something your wife said (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kestrel9000, Dave in Northridge

    She wants to see other people, right? 'Same old face ...' and all that?

    Dumb idea, dumb diary. Sorry.

    Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

    by Clem Yeobright on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 03:31:03 AM PST

  •  Unlimited (0+ / 0-)

    Keep in mind, Im not talking about limiting a Congress person to two terms, but lets say like 3-5 terms.  After 3-5 terms its probably time for a new face.

    I dont believe elections fix things, but new faces and new ideas fix things.  

    Would it have been a good idea for there to have been term limits in Germany around Adolf Hitler's time in power?  Politicians become too powerful after a time in office and the people dont always get it right.  Did the people get it right in Germany by electing Adolf Hitler?  You know he was elected by the people and served multiple terms.  

  •  No more Lame Duck sessions (5+ / 0-)

       One reform I could support at the state and Federal level is to ban lame duck sessions. The legislative year needs end before the election so that people know what they are up to. Defeated politicians shouldn't be making important decisions on their way out. True emergency sessions could be authorized by   some super majority vote (60 - 67%) and concurrence of Gov/Pres. Too much important or controversial stuff is pushed into these sessions where too many people are unaccountable and the public is not paying attention.  

    •  We could seat the new session a lot sooner. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Iberian

      Like December 1st.

      Otherwise, we could wind up with a national emergency and no legislature to authorize spending.

      "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

      by JesseCW on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 04:34:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sure (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JesseCW, Odysseus

           There are multiple ways to handle an overlap and/or emergencies. The important point though is to prevent legislators from ramming through controversial or unpopular bills until after  the election. All bills need to be passed before the election so that voters can pass their judgement on the governments actions.

  •  I know its unpopular here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Iberian

    but I favor term limits. Where they have been implemented in state governments the terms are too short and make the legislators ineffective. The "terms" need to be longer.

    I like 18 year term limits for members of the Senate, House and the SCOTUS.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 04:35:31 AM PST

    •  I actually agree with a hard term limit on the (4+ / 0-)

      SCOTUS.

      If we give them a 20 year term, for one thing, we'll end this game where Presidents keep trying to make younger and younger picks so as to dominate the court longer.

      It's a different issue, though.  They aren't subject to being bounced by voters directly.

      "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

      by JesseCW on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 04:50:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I like 18 years for the SCOTUS (0+ / 0-)

        If planned correctly a President would have a new pick every two years. It would also allow the Court to adjust to a single new member over two terms. If each seat on the SCOTUS had a term, and we do this for other federal positions, if a Justice resigned, retired, or passed away, there would be some terms that would be shorter than 18 years. If the remaining term was five years it would allow naming someone distinguished in their late sixties, or older, to a five year position. Term limits for a members of the SCOTUS has bipartisan support. I'd love to see Congress move on it. All the present members would likely have to be grandfathered under the life-time rules, or maybe they could serve in the federal court system if they wanted to. Any member of the SCOTUS that was "termed out" could always have a job at one of the big DC law firms who have an active appellate practice.  

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 05:22:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's just goofy to have someone complete a term (0+ / 0-)

          rather then getting a whole new term.

          A few years is barely time to settle into the job.

          Anyone who terms out can go enjoy their six figure pension.

          One of the biggest dangers of the term limit is that they might be concerned about getting a future job with some high paying DC law firm.

          "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

          by JesseCW on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 05:29:08 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  UK Supreme Court (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Iberian, JesseCW

            As an international comparison, judges in the UK have a mandatory retirement age. This is either 75 or 70, depending on when the they were first appointed as a judge.

            By the time judges reach the Supreme Court level they are usually at least aged in the mid 50s, so it is unlikely that any Supreme Court Judge would serve more than 15-20 years and most would serve for less than that. This seems to be functionally equivalent to the sort of US Supreme Court  term limits being discussed in this thread.

            There is no man alive who is sufficiently good to rule the life of the man next door to him. Sir Rhys Hopkin Morris, M.P.

            by Gary J on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 07:31:37 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  the founding fathers (0+ / 0-)

    did not want congress to be a career. they wanted it for people to serve people. congress is not doing that now. the corruption of starts after their second term. so limit all members of congress- senators and house to 2 terms- 6 and 4 years. let them run after taking a break. but yes, term limits is needed. it is sad that people are in congress for 40 years and have done nothing.

  •  Having to stand for election every two years (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JesseCW, Simplify, ItsSimpleSimon

    is supposed to keep them on a short leash. If the electorate pays no attention and contents itself with having no real choice (Republicans propose interchangeables, while Democrats pre-select single candidates), then there is not much to be done.
    Citizenship comes with many obligations, of which the electorate has been kept largely unaware. Our task, I think, is to change that.

    We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

    by hannah on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 04:57:49 AM PST

  •  No, (5+ / 0-)

    Lawrence Lewis said it best. I would add that besides empowering lobbyists, it also further empowers the Sheldon Adelsons and Koch brothers of the world because each newbie would be completely beholden to them.

    Look at the Congresspeople who seem to have the most sense: Reid, Harken, Biden (when he was there), Pelosi, even Grassley (compared to whatever new teabagger would be in his place), etc. They have expertise and power because of their service and knowledge.

    You can't scare me, I'm sticking to the Union - Woody Guthrie

    by sewaneepat on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 05:35:29 AM PST

  •  twice. i believe in troll limits. 8/6 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave in Northridge

    clime parches on. terms: ocean rise, weather re-patterning, storm pathology, drout-famine, acceptance of nature.

    by renzo capetti on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 06:30:23 AM PST

  •  Term limits are like a debt ceiling (3+ / 0-)

    A measure intended to "save us from ourselves" which does not actually accomplish that goal.

  •  Should Congress have age limits? (0+ / 0-)

    That's the more interesting question in the same vein...

  •  Why deprive ourselves of representatives who know (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    avsp

    how things work? If someone is doing a good enough job to get re-elected, fine with me. States that have enacted term limits have merely prevented their own representatives from gaining seniority and positions of power.

    I speak as a resident of Massachusetts; we're losing a powerful and effective advocate in John Kerry, just 3 years after we lost Ted Kennedy. I'm very glad we have Elizabeth Warren, but I wouldn't want the system to be changed so that it would be impossible for us to have a senior statesman such as a Kennedy or a Kerry serving multiple terms.

    Please visit: http://www.jkmediasource.org

    by Noisy Democrat on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:40:26 AM PST

    •  Exactly. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Noisy Democrat

      Seems to me that when Ohio enacted term limits we lost a ton of knowledge not only of the workings of government, but also on important subjects that one or two of our long-time senators/ representatives had made a special study. And we now get feckless assholes who don't give a damn about governing while they're in because they CAN'T stay very long. Trash the place, then move out.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site