Term limits for politicians & benefit cuts (Representatives, health care, votes)
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.
With the country being divided and the dysfunction in the House and Senate is it time
to impose term limits? Why don't we hear about these politicians who stay in office
for decades & get great perks like health care, pensions, etc. when programs and
funds are being cut everywhere else? Shouldn't they "serve their country as public
servants" for let's just say 8 years and move on without those perks? Wouldn't
that help this deficit?
With the country being divided and the dysfunction in the House and Senate is it time
to impose term limits? Why don't we hear about these politicians who stay in office
for decades & get great perks like health care, pensions, etc. when programs and
funds are being cut everywhere else? Shouldn't they "serve their country as public
servants" for let's just say 8 years and move on without those perks? Wouldn't
that help this deficit?
You can't just impose something like this: who is going to impose them. It has to be set up as the law which would take the congress to decide to do this. That isn't very likely but I wish is were. I will add, 8 years wouldn't work either because then you have another law to change, senators are elected for 6 years, remember? I would like to see, no more than 3 terms for senators (18 years) and 4 for house members, with house members being elected every 4, not 2 years. The way it is now, in all fairness to house members, they have to be running all the time. Not only is it costly, it takes time away from the job.
Now as for benies: I am in the minority I am sure, but if these men and women are going to give up their private practices, jobs or whatever to serve, they do deserve compensation in the form of retirement, health care benies, etc. As much as they now get? Absolutely NO, but they do deserve something.
Although prohibited by the Constitution, I favor reduced pay for Congress during sequesters, no pay at all during government shutdowns and term limits. Also a constitutional amendment limiting campaign spending.
I used to be in favor of term limits, but would that really do anything? Am I supposed to believe that if a republican or democrat has a term limit, we simply won't get just another person who has the same views.
that is great if we lived in the perfect world, but we don't and it isn't easy to remove those who are incumbants.
Yep..they simply won't make courageous votes unless they know they don't have to run for re-election. They will only vote for what's best to keep their seats. They're in love with Washington, and i don't give a damn that half of them claim that they aren't. THEY ARE!! ALL OF THEM!
These politicians go to Washington with good intentions i'm sure, but they fall in love with the perks and just can't see themselves leaving. They whine and cry about all the money they're forced to raise, and yet, you don't see them throwing up their hands and deciding to go home after a few terms. Nope..to the contrary. They cling on to those seats with the determination of a hyena eyeing holding onto a carcass.
That's a problem.
I'm not normally for term limits, and i sometimes vacillate, but truth be told, it's the only way to get this government functioning again.
Term limits are a must. The states can start a constitutional convention and make this happen if Congress doesn't want to limit their own powers (however, I feel like with enough pressure many in Congress would pass this amendment).
that is great if we lived in the perfect world, but we don't and it isn't easy to remove those who are incumbants.
I do not think you understand how term limits in the House will destroy the nation. Everything in the House is determined by seniority. The only way States with fewer than three Representatives can have any say in any of those committees is by continually electing their one or two Representatives repeatedly. Otherwise only States with large populations will control the House. I have absolutely no intention of ceding rulership to California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinios, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Georgia. Combined those eight States would control 51.7% of the House. The other 42 States would be completely disenfranchised.
With regard to term limits in the Senate, does it really make a difference? Every State has two Senators, so limiting them to two or three terms would make no real difference. However, term limits in the House would certainly destroy the nation.
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.
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.
