Posted on 02/12/2013 8:51:43 AM PST by goodnesswins
Elections = term limits. And it's not like states with term limits are electing anyone better than states without.
I've always been in favor of eliminating the Electoral College. What's so hard about one person-one vote?
The Electoral College is a system to keep the Republicrats in place, unchallenged.
“As we saw with Obamacare, no politicians wrote that monstrosity”
Exactly. No politician read it, either. That’s things as they stand. Why would such things be more likely to happen with fresh blood? I don’t get it. Seems to me there’s more chance with people who don’t know how things are supposedly supposed to work than people who have spent decades not reading bills written by the permanent government.
See my tagline; that’s been my opinion for a long, long time. But realistically, getting congress to limit their own terms of office is not a winning proposition. Failing that, we need to ensure that other than making a pretty good living, you can’t get rich in public service.
Why, for instance, would a lawyer who could earn one to two million a year without breaking a sweat want that $174,000 per year salary? Even with all the perks and bennies, you’d think that they could do lots better!
We know the answer (the BIG bucks come later), so how do we correct it?
First, make all political donations anonymous. If a pol doesn’t know who the buyer is, he can’t sell influence. The donors can support whoever they believe will act in their best interest, but can’t BUY them.
Next, forbid lobbying by any former member of congress, forever. Hire someone to represent your interests in Washington if you wish, just not a former legislator.
Finally, make congress subject to all laws to which the folks are subject. No perks or bennies not available to you and me if we choose to pay for them. Social security, Obamacare, individual retirement account choices, just like the rest of us.
Those should eliminate about 80% of the here-to-get-rich crowd, leaving those who genuinely want to serve (or can’t get a job on the outside because they’re flamin’ libs who believe that business is eeevul!).
Then we might not need term limits.
< /rant >
Why 12 years? Why not two terms for a representative and two for a senator? Better yet, one term? This 12 business seems arbitrary.
The laws they passed to protect their worthless behinds are the ones we need to look at... If we term limited these people it would give MORE power to the Washington Establishment. The Establishment's the people who really get things done - the faces we don't see - the people with the real power.
Ever notice in hearings when a congress person's reading questions and they're struggling to pronounce the words because they're too stupid to understand the concepts on the paper in front of them? Well, those papers - those questions were written FOR them. The power people in the system - the ones who write the papers and actually read the bills - are the ones we need to ferret out. The many clueless airheads 'representing us' are not the problem. Getting in a new bunch every few years -some who can pronounce the words and understand the concepts - but DON'T grasp the system - would be WORSE. It took a while to create the mess - it's going to take more than a simple solution to get us out.
Putting term limits into effect would shift power to the unelected staffers and bureaucrats in Washington.
Who do you think wrote Obamacare? Was it 435 Congressmen working diligently through the night for weeks at a time? No, it was thousands of staffers all putting into the law whatever they felt was needed. Yes, they were directed by a few Congressmen, but these unelected “officials” are who write the laws, make the deals, and often explain to the Congressmen (especially the newer ones) what they should and should not vote for.
Let me say this again:
Putting term limits on Congress just shifts power to unelected people who run Washington.
As for ending the Electoral College, I think that may be the stupidest decision that can be considered. The day the Electoral College is done away with is the day we are no longer a Republic.
Republicanism was always impossible without a certain cultivating standing behind the rulers and ruled. We need an electorate which knows what it’s doing, or at least one which votes for people who know what they’re doing. Obviously that’s long gone. But either we despair, or we can tinker and find away to stand athwart democracy. It worked with the awful specter of FDR. I don’t hear anyone bemoaning the loss of the Framers’ vision of presidential elections in this regard, at least.
A Constitutional amendment I would be in favor of is that no bill can be passed by either house of Congress unless that bill have been verbally read into the record by sitting members of that house.
Isn’t California a term limits utopia?
You don’t necessarily need term limits for SCOTUS. All you must do is overturn the stupid notion that you can’t impeach them on political grounds. Whensoever a judge rules against freedom properly construed it is as if he committed a crime.
A Constitutional amendment I would be in favor of is that no bill can be passed by either house of Congress unless that bill has been verbally read into the record by sitting members of that house.
I don’t get it. Obamacare already happened. Why are you using it as an example of what would happen without stalwart old corpses like Strom Thurmond or Robert Byrd? Why would noobies be more likely to let the power behind the power call the shots? I don’t see it. It may not make a difference, but I don’t see how it’d be worse.
Please don’t take the following critique too personally goodnesswins.
I will support term limits if that makes you happy. But I think that people who suggest term limits are possibly not familiar with the constitutionally limited powers of the federal government.
More specifically, regardless that the federal government now regulates many things in our life, it actually has no constitutional authority to do so. In fact, about the only thing that Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate on a daily basis is postal services. Otherwise, all other aspects of our lives that the government influences should be under the control of local and state lawmakers, not federal lawmakers.
So while I understand why people want term limits for lawmakers, the real problem is that corrupt Congress, along with corrupt presidents, have wrongly stolen 10th Amendment protected government power from the states which the federal government uses to illegally regulate many things in our lives.
Repeal the 17th and closed primaries all within one month from state to state so nobody has to drop out early because the east coast didn’t like them. Run-off 60 days later.
Oh, I fully agree with you on getting the government out of our schools or keeping our kids out of government schools.
This mess from economics, immigration, 2nd Amendment, term limits.... can all be laid at the foot of government run schools assisted by their comrades, communist teacher’s unions.
I just seem to be a lone voice in the woods on government schools but glad to read someone else sees the problem.
There is however, a very common human frailty and that is how easily a good person is corrupted by power. Give them too many terms and almost all of them will be corrupted and the party and government will come before the people which is exactly what we have today.
At best we are third in line when it comes to 95% of politicians. Party, government power, then maybe the people.
There is already quite a list of potential constitutional amendments that fix long overdue problems, and I think it matters far less who fixes these problems as long as they are fixed.
The best bet, once there is a Republican congress and president again, is for one of the states that has not yet resolved for a balanced budget amendment to offer to do so.
Only two states are left if they made such a resolution, it would force a constitutional convention. When they almost made it last time, congress immediately offered an ordinary balanced budget *law*, that was overturned by the Supreme Court.
Not wanting a constitutional convention, congress would still have to act to pass a balanced budget amendment by a 2/3rds majority of both houses. And then 3/4ths of the states would have to approve it.
If 38 states approved, we would finally have a balanced budget amendment to the constitution.
And this would be the *easiest* one to make.
That is the way it is here in Texas. No year round sessions.
FDR’s term fundamentally changed this country in ways that most of us will never know or understand. Pre-1930s America is a stark contrast to the bastardized idea of republicanism we have today. We were a nation of no debt, no (income) taxes, a powerful citizenry and military, and an equal and just government.
It’s only been downhill from there.
Separate problem. One step at a time.
Only God could cure all our political ills in one blow. Kill the snakes first. Then deal with the insects later.
I agree.
Repeal of the 17th amendment.
But I am OK with term limits too.
AND also no pensions for ELECTED officials.
AND all laws apply to congress and all governmental institutions.
That’s a start... :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.