Posted on 01/05/2019 11:46:17 PM PST by caww
I wouldn’t mind a system where a congressperson can be elected a certain number of times but then has to take a term off. They can run again after that but won’t be able to get the incumbent advantage but if people liked them and they did a good job they’d have a good shot at winning.
Just repeal the 17th Amendment. The original way of selecting Senator, through the State Capitols was a check on the deep state and political parties, much like the electoral college is on the President’s election. 2 year terms is a check on the House.
Term limits will allow the deep state to only gain power.
And the pigs are going to vote themselves out of office?
The only way we get term limits is at the end of a spear.
Not t going anywhere. Congress will not limit their power.
You mean, like Putin does in Russia?
Don’t really need term limits. Just end the “retirement”. Where in the Constitution can one justify paying a person who is no longer a congressperson tax dollars?
18 is too long. Two terms for POTUS, then two terms for Congress period. No flipping over from the Senate to the House to extend their money laundering off the tax payer.
This is exactly what is needed!
I think it will take a March on DC, to get this on to the floor.
These grifters need these Careers-in-Congress curtailed, yesterday.
Elections are term limits...
**********
Maybe so. But when reelected over and over they aren’t term
limited beyond the limit of the elected term. What they need
is a maximum number of total years served.
I believe 12 years total for anyone in congress, 6 in the house 6 in the senate, or 12 in one.
But that is the process for a Bill into Law. Amendment is different, since it goes to states for ratification. And this amendment empowers out-of-office state representatives and candidates.
So people now who can’t get elected now are voting .
I would say they shouldn’t hold any elected office during the off year. It would mean they couldn’t take an easy job at some company that they gave a sweet heart government hand out too when they were in congress. I mean, they could do that, but that means they are less likely to be re-elected.
In a representative republic, the people should be free to vote for whomever they want to represent them, for as many terms as they want that representation. "Term limits" is like the old "stop me before I kill again" argument; keep the right to vote for someone, but only let me do it once?
That said, the solution in the Senate is not term limits, it is to eliminate the elections altogether and let the state legislatures decide whom to send to the Senate. The states should be free to choose anybody they want; the term is limited by how long the legislature feels the Senator is being effective in representing their state's interests. The people can then decide how well their state representatives are selecting their Senators.
Presidential term limits are a post-17th amendment phenomenon. I wonder why we never had a 3rd term president until Roosevelt? Was it because the Senate no longer represented the states, and the states couldn't influence the federal government like they did just 20 years earlier? Repeal the 17th amendment instead of placing term limits on Senators.
House Representatives are too numerous and their districts are too small to limit whom the locals wish to send to Congress. However, with the rise of the influence of national parties due to the need to raise campaign cash for 33 Senate elections every two years, there is a party trickle-down of money to the House by party members in the Senate. If you eliminate Senate elections, you dry up a major source of campaign funds that would naturally flow to House races, too.
In the House, I'd look at two areas: 1) reforming district reapportionment and gerrymandering, and 2) increasing the number of districts from 435 to some higher number.
For gerrymandering, I understand the need to keep natural communities together (where straight grid-mapping may not work), so perhaps a reapportionment that keeps geographic ZIP codes together might work. Try grid-mapping whole ZIP codes instead of snaking "ethnic" zones into districts.
For House size, the current limit of 435 Representatives was set by the The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 based on the census of 1910 when the population was 92,228,496. The result of the 2010 census was 308,745,538, a 235% increase in the last 100 years. Maybe it's time to increase the size of the House? This would rebalance the party split in Congress, as well as increase the Electoral College to influence presidential elections.
In summary, the better alternatives to "term limits" are:
1. Repeal the 17th amendment.
2. Fix the gerrymandering problem in the House.
3. Increase the size of the House to match current population.
Maybe with a larger and more fairly redistricted House, we won't see controversial splits between the Electoral College result and the so-called "popular vote" that the left uses to delegitimize results it doesn't like?
Do these things and a natural term limit will be restored across all of the federal government.
-PJ
The civil service needs term limits more than the elected class.
I am watching President Pence and the GOP/Democrat “negotiators” reveal the intrangegence of the Democrat Congress. This is being very clearly recorded and verified.
Why?
Well when the President Declares an emergency, part of that will be that the Democrats would not fund the security of the Southern Border, The other evidence will be the statistics of illegal crossings, human trafficking, and the murders of US citizens by illegals, and drug trafficking across the country, topped by the next caravan whichi will be between 10K and 15K illegals.
That’s the definition of an emergency which would altogether satisfy National Emergencies Act (Pub.L. 94–412, 90 Stat. 1255.
The Dems will be sorry they ever tried to obstruct PDJT on border security. He is about to secure his second term as president. The Dems are now giving our president EXACTLY what he wants and thats continued intransigence. PDJT is about to hand them their collective fat Democrap arses!Grin for the camera Nancy and Chuck....suckers!
......”the solution in the Senate is not term limits, it is to eliminate the elections altogether and let the state legislatures decide whom to send to the Senate”.....
I wouldn’t agree to that.
Thank you....
That’s the only way as I see it, ..............they aren’t going to term limit their gravy train nor moving the chairs around the deck. The desire for power and money is too easily obtained once they’re in the political lane.
Sounds about right....
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.