Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-05-2014, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,827 posts, read 6,936,232 times
Reputation: 3416

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall View Post
12 years maximum House and a separate 12 years maximum Senate might also be OK, and easier to get, that's 24 years total.

Term limits would cripple the seniority system, and that would be great.
It would mean non-career politicians might have a chance to accomplish something while still young enough to read the bills.

It would require a constitutional amendment, and since Congress won't do this, it would require the state legislatures to act.
Start at the bottom, push it at the primary level, but the powers that be in both parties won't be any help, and third parties can't possibly succeed.

Grow your local Tea Party to pressure within your state GOP, that's probably the only chance of even getting it discussed.

Meanwhile, Re-elect Nobody

I would say a 12 year total maximum. If you are in the house for 4 years and run for senate, you can only serve 8 more years, then back to the real world to live with what you passed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2014, 04:12 PM
 
31,909 posts, read 26,979,379 times
Reputation: 24815
Coming from a city with term limits for elected officials am here to tell you the scheme is not full proof.

In the last NYC election it was more about a game of musical chairs than fresh faces. Yes, offices were vacated due to term limits but all in all it was more about a reshuffle than anything else. Ok, the City Council received mostly fresh members but if the last election was any guide they will simply move about as well.

Once in office you find large majority of politicians spend a bulk of their time building "relationships" and currying favour with those that have deep pockets and or special interests. Those groups can be then called upon to fund/back this or that person who is term limited out of one office as they run for another.

About 90% or more of current NYC government elected officials that were tem limited out of one office ran and were elected to another including Mr. de Blasio.

As many have noted about term limits the thing isn't really needed if persons got up off their butts and voted. All over the USA voter apathy is extremely high and no it is not just these past years. If you look at election participation rates from say the 1960's to today you see a gradual and persistent decline.

Persons run their mouths about this or that policy but when election day comes you hear a different story. Suddenly everyone has better things to do. Persons in Virginia want to recall the AG over his stance on gay marriage. But what did they expect from the man? The past election in that state had the lowest turn out in history, now everyone is up in arms over this or that policy. Well elections have consequences.

Finally keep in mind that term limited elected officials are in some way *less* beholden to voters than those who must face another election. Members of both parties in House or Senate would probably pass any number of bills on issues ranging from immigration, gay equality, women's pay equality, trade bills, and so forth if they knew via term limits they were immune from any backlash by not voting their district/state.

Enacting term limits will simply increase sending more persons to Congress who are in it for what they can get out of it during their set time in office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2014, 04:19 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,504,185 times
Reputation: 1775
Yep, term limits has broken our states government. There's no institutional knowledge, and most of the elected officials are spending time worry about what will happen after they get out.

It switches the balance of power from the legislative to the executive branch, because the legislature spends time hoping from committee to committee without every figuring out enough about government to effectively provide oversight. The only people that know how the government really works are in the executive branch and they know they can wait people out and eventually they will get off their committee.

I love term-limits in theory. In practice, not so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:05 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top