[autumnraine]

Good idea, unfortunately the people who vote for the Presidential term limits won’t vote for their own term limits.

Just like they can vote themselves a pay raise.

These people are their own bosses with other people’s money.

[Ken522]

Your amendment covers a lot of ground, JB - I’m sure the esteemed members of Congress would want to discuss it, were they ever to even consider it ....

[BenLurkin]

Term limits in Congress would be good for America.

Which is why the Democrats will never permit it.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

I would rather have the Bricker Amendment.
It would not allow any treaty to override our Constitution.
As Treaties now are above our Constitution.

[DaGman]

I’ve never liked term limits. Term limits means someone that doesn’t live in my district doesn’t like who the people in my district elected but that someone won’t move into my district to vote against him/her.

The best term limit tool is at the ballot box by the people that do the voting.

[DaGman]

I’ve never liked term limits. Term limits means someone that doesn’t live in my district doesn’t like who the people in my district elected but that someone won’t move into my district to vote against him/her.

The best term limit tool is at the ballot box by the people that do the voting.

[umgud]

Our politicians are only a reflection of the problem. The real problem is too many stupid and selfish voters. There’s far too many unpaying/uncontributing passengers steering the ship.

[rightwingextremist1776]

I have a better idea....No person can vote in any election unless they have paid income taxes for the past 2 years....

[stockpirate]

The ruling elite will ignore any parts of the law or constitution thwy wish. And the sheep, some of who freely post here on FR, will justify anything the leader of their particular cult of personallity group wants to ignore. Case in point the O’s COLB issue.

[cripplecreek]

How bout we protect the one we have first? Is your state on the list?

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

[Mr Ramsbotham]

How about this: any legislator who proposes legislation that fails to pass, permanently loses his seat.

[Tzimisce]

Let me get this straight: you want a bunch of people with cushy, easy jobs that make them millionaires to give it up after a couple of terms in office?

LOL.

[bpjam]

The Supremes already nuked much of what you (and I) want.

[exnavy]

I have a better one, much simpler as well.

No public office shall be a payed position, federal, state, or local, including retirement, under penalty of death.

[fr_freak]

Actually, I think the Constitution as written originally had the right idea. The problem is that idiots have tinkered with it since. In my view, the downward trend of our government has two basic causes:

1) lack of accountability of representatives to voters
2) social parasites being able to vote themselves free money

Ironically, the Founders built in safeguards against both of these problems - we just removed them after the fact. Originally, federal Senators were elected by the state legislatures to be representatives of the States, to act in the best interest of the State, and to be accountable directly to those state legislatures. Currently, our Senators laugh at their constituents because they are just some vague mob. But a state legislature would be a smaller body and would have very specific demands of a senator. Fail to represent those demands and you're out, and no amount of silly TV ads touting your status as a "fighter for working families" and other such meaningless nonsense would fool them. Meanwhile, we should have fairly stringent requirements regarding residency for state Senators and Representatives, and federal Representatives. Perhaps a 5-year full-time residency requirement to be able to run for any office, so we can avoid Hillary-type carpet-bagging, and all representatives should be required to have an open town-hall type meeting IN PERSON with their voting constituents at least once a year.

The second part is reducing the right to vote to those who would be responsible, who have a real stake in the outcome of elections. The vote has been dumbed down to any warm idiot over the age of eighteen at the same time that public education has been dumbed down to the level of your average Asian kindergarten, only without the respect. You cannot have non-producers voting in your elections, period. The vote should be limited to property-owners and military veterans, and there should be stringent ID checks. Voter eligibility lists should be published by the local governments a full year before any election, so as to allow for any dispute.

I am convinced that the closer our government representatives are to us, the more they will behave, so voting should be as local as possible, and then the power trickles up from there.

[KrisKrinkle]

Not sure that goes deep enough, especially for representatives who get elected every two years.

All of these guys have a staff to help them. A “permanent” staffer could work for various congressmen over the years and become experienced in their job.

A new congressman comes in and hires the experienced staffer, because he’s experienced, and takes his advice.

What we’d end up with (and probably have now to some extent) is an entrenced bureaucracy of permanent staffers who are the real power behind the elected officials. These would be people the voters can’t reach to replace.

[Sci Fi Guy]

It does not have to be that extreme. I'd like 4 terms house and 2 senate consecutively. Letting them run for different offices, or sitting out a term or two would make a huge change.

We could even grandfather it in, say it starts in 2020 or it exempts the current members of congress. Anything to get the limits in. Gradually the current members will be replaced.

[Seruzawa]

IIRC a Founding Father said, “Only a moral people can be free”.

It’s a mistake to fall into the same trap that the libs do. No amount of govt rules, laws, threats, tweaking, etc can cure the basic problem of an unethical population dominated by materialism. Eventually the entire nation becomes one big prison with a corrupt brutal murderous govt that ends up being worse than an anarchy.

We’re at the tipping point. No amount of new laws can solve the problem. It takes active involvement in the political arena. And the target is the schools as much as anything. They need to be purged of the “experts”, the legal drug pushers, the counselors, the textbooks full of lies. We have a population weaned on govt loving lies and anti-human propaganda.

[marsh2]

Term limits result in an uninformed legislature. Most of these issues take years to gain some expertise in order to understand the vocabulary and programs involved. I want someone who has been through more than a few briefings and hearings on a topic to be making decisions about what goes into a bill.

Term limits ends up with uninformed decisions or the legislator being told by lobbyists or his/her staff how to vote on issues. Un-elected “handlers” would acquire more and more power as the bureaucrats.

We have seen it in the State legislature.

[Condor51]

I think a good start would be a Constitutional Amendment requiring every member of Congress have an IQ of at least 110.

The reason I posit this is that we have certifiable MORONS in Congress and THEY'RE writing Laws that WE all have to live by. And that is the classic definition of:

The Inmates Are Running The Asylum

Sheila Jackson-Lee, Maxine Waters, Patty 'gym shoes' Murry, 'Cadillac' Charlie Rangel, Babs Boxer, Di-Fi, Linda Sanchez (or 90% of anyone from CA), and in IL: Bobby Rush, Louis Gutierrez and Davis Danny are just a few IDIOTS that are or were in Congress that come to mind. Oh, almost forgot the *best* example -- 'Jihad' Cindy McKinney (IQ of 30).

Ergo, any potential Congress-critter would have to submit a certified copy of their IQ test to their respective Secretaries of State before they could be placed on the ballot. Just like they do with the minimum number of Signatures

Yes, I know. There's a lot of women on my list, and minorities too. Well that's the way it goes, if the shoe fits...