Absolutely not, I believe term limits give more power to lobby groups. If voters every two to six years feel their Congressional representation is doing well why should they be punished by term limits. I’d rather we open the door to Congressional Recalls for House and Senate members.
And if they’re fine voting in a dementia sufferer because they recognize her name on the ballot? That’s the biggest problem currently is uninformed voters just keep voting the same people in. Not because they like what they’re doing but because they recognize the name.
The voters choose their representative, but the parties put who is on the ticket. I’m not a fan of Bobert but her district voted her into office twice. That’s on them. If they vote in Mickey Mouse then they live with that choice.
Writing legislation is a skill developed over time. It’s like saying a doctor needs term limits, do you want a new doctor or one with years of experience?
Incumbents have huge advantages naturally (voter recognition, experience to point to, pork projects passed, the machine behind them, etc, etc. so term limits are much more likely to result in the will of the people being heard.
I do believe we need checks on the Supreme Court and whether that be a term limit or a Presidential review every four years, off cycle of the Presidential election, either works.
Term limits work well for unelected positions. Judges are a perfect example of that.
Absolutely not, I believe term limits give more power to lobby groups. If voters every two to six years feel their Congressional representation is doing well why should they be punished by term limits. I’d rather we open the door to Congressional Recalls for House and Senate members.
And if they’re fine voting in a dementia sufferer because they recognize her name on the ballot? That’s the biggest problem currently is uninformed voters just keep voting the same people in. Not because they like what they’re doing but because they recognize the name.
The voters choose their representative, but the parties put who is on the ticket. I’m not a fan of Bobert but her district voted her into office twice. That’s on them. If they vote in Mickey Mouse then they live with that choice.
This is nonsense; corruption takes time. New members will be more resistant to lobbying, not less.
The presidency has had almost a century of term limits. That has not actually stopped the centralization of power to the office of the presidency.
Yes, but there is less than would be otherwise. Or are you suggest lifetime president would be less corrupt?
Writing legislation is a skill developed over time. It’s like saying a doctor needs term limits, do you want a new doctor or one with years of experience?
Incumbents have huge advantages naturally (voter recognition, experience to point to, pork projects passed, the machine behind them, etc, etc. so term limits are much more likely to result in the will of the people being heard.
So let’s get rid of every term limit then?
I do believe we need checks on the Supreme Court and whether that be a term limit or a Presidential review every four years, off cycle of the Presidential election, either works.
Term limits work well for unelected positions. Judges are a perfect example of that.