If we instead Repealed 16, 17 and 24, the problems would fix themselves in short order
Let’s repeal 17 and 19, too.
Before clicking, I thought “age limits” might refer to changing the age at which a person is eligible to vote, and that would be a great idea.
What with “40 is the new 20” being a true statement regarding intellectual and emotional maturity in the vast majority of cases, the voting age should be raised accordingly. Exceptions can be permitted in the case where a person who is less than the new voting age can prove that he or she has actually grown a brain. This is a difficult task, given 24/7 brainwashing by the media and the educational system, but some youths have overcome that handicap.
The term limits for senator are exactly what I’ve been proposing for years. However, the term for congress is too short - they should be allowed to serve up to 4 terms.
The age limit is too high. Politicians need to be retired before 80, not able to start a new term at 80. I’d prefer an age limit that states that the person can’t run if their term is going to push them passed the age of 78. NO MORE 80 year olds period - that goes for president, too.
> . Incumbent Senators and Representatives at the time this amendment is ratified will be included in this limitation. <
I’m strongly in favor of term limits. But as a practical matter, that single sentence will kill the whole idea. No swamp creature will support it.
The only way we’ll ever get term limit laws will be if we “grandfather in” current office-holders. Yeah, I know that’s distasteful. But it’s the only way.
No, no, and NO. A Constitutional convention would be a disaster.
one term limit for ALL elected offices at the federal level
age limit of 70 for all elected officials at time of election
repeal 16,17,20,22,23,24th amendments.
Add in something about only being allowed to be in session for 3 months in a year and 6 continuous months in any two years.
We already have term limits. They’re called elections. The problem is everyone wants term limits for everybody except their own representatives.
The idea that Government is going to pass limits to it’s own power and individual Congressmen are going to dissolve their dynasties and money laundering kick-back machines is silly.
“Beware the Silent Artillery of Time”. Terms Limits. The first obvious consideration is; why are term limits desired? Do you want to abdicate your responsibility as Government of the people, by the people, for the people? Are all elected Senators and Representatives corrupt? Are they all hungry for the power? Are they of a different political persuasion than yourself? Is it gender or race-related? Is it because they are independently wealthy? Is it because they are advocates for the designated hitter? Do they support/despise labor unions? Do they get too comfortable with their lot in life as a representative of their constituents? Terms limits do nothing to satisfy any of the above. Perhaps you just want new blood now and then. Perfectly understandable. But what will term limits change? In and of itself term limits do not restrict their individual power, their pensions, their potential corruption; it does not force them to abide by the same laws the people (who are the Government) must obey. As a matter of fact, if facing a pre-determined end to their term they will work much harder in their own best interests rather than the interests of their constituents. A modification to the Constitution, implementing term limits, will have a multitude of unintended consequences. None of us are clever enough to foresee them and modify the constitution to address the hidden circumstances.
Additional Consideration:
Fight the real fight.
Gerrymander: Manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class. Achieve (a result) by manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency.
The term gerrymandering is named after Elbridge Gerry, who, as Governor of Massachusetts in 1812, signed a bill that created a partisan district in the Boston area that was compared to the shape of a mythological salamander. The term has negative connotations and gerrymandering is almost always considered a corruption of the democratic process.
When you hear re-districting – think gerrymander. Though the constitution sets up the establishment of congressional districts, it is up to the states to implement. Just for grins look up the map for Congressional District 5 in several states. Try another District. The boundaries are telling. This is not a federal legal issue. It is up to each state to create district boundaries. This is where to get involved in attempting to have our voices heard. Local and state representation must be involved.
June 29, 2019 (Reuters) – “The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that federal judges have no power to police partisan gerrymandering - the practice of manipulating electoral district boundaries for political gain - likely will embolden politicians to pursue more extreme efforts free from the fear of judicial interference, experts said.”
In addition, repeal the 17th amendment. The Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution established the popular election of United States senators by the people of the states. The amendment supersedes Article I, §3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution, under which senators were elected by state legislatures. It also alters the procedure for filling vacancies in the Senate, allowing for state legislatures to permit their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election can be held.
The popular election of senators almost certainly assures incumbents get re-elected with minimal effort and expense compared to a challenger. This would not be the case if the state legislatures remained as the electors. It would level the playing field and the selected Senator would be more representative of the current will of the people of the state. It would almost certainly ensure term limits for senators.
While we’re at it, prevent those elected to Congress or working for Congress in any capacity to become a lobbyist or serving on a corporate board.
Better: make Congresscritters pay higher taxes and fees, say double the going rates with half the value for any deduction, and make that liability continue for 4 or 5 years after they’ve been out of federal government AND professionally lobbying the government.
Also make insider trading by Congress illegal, require staffers to report on them if they do, and publish their investments made while in office.
If they can’t feather their nests them staying becomes less of a problem.
I would supplement Section 4- All Supreme Court Justices must step down after 14 years on the bench regardless of age!
A good thought, but what about the horde of utterly unaccountable career “civil servants”?
I submit that they present a far greater danger than lifelong congresscritters. For example, who outside of Southern California would know about Adam Schiff if it were not for James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, etc?
Placing additional restrictions on the constitutionally prescribed parts of our government while doing nothing to contain the morass of the administrative state will just tip the balance of power further to the bureaucrats.
I’d rather see Federal employment be term-limited before constitutional offices.
They are never going to vote to limit themselves.
We no longer enforce current laws. New laws mean nothing.
Never, not until you limit staff. People who propose these types of idiocy are either idiots or commie operators.
Do not fall for this. Term limits of staffing will end the swamp, not term limiting the folks the CONSTITUENTS send to the capitals.
SMH!
Term limits are cool, but a MUST-include is a service limit on office assistants. They already control everything and behind the scenes, they change offices and gather “experience.” NOBODY can serve, in the lifetime aggregate, as an assistant to an elected official for more than the 12 year limitation on either house. They are unaccountable and their power will only grow as unrestrained “experienced” assistants will be highly sought because they “know the ropes.”
The Founders were very prudent to set the minimum age to serve in Congress and become POTUS. One could hope that by a certain age there would be a degree of wisdom, though AOC proves this is not always the case. As for a maximum age 80 would not be unreasonable, but strict term limits might take care of the problem.
Our current troubles are very much the result of a media totally willing to become the propaganda arm of the Democratic party. The Founders of our republic had faith that an independent free press would shine the light of truth on political miscreants. Sadly a independent media has become a thing of the past and the WhiteHouse is now colluding with the media on how to report the news. I cannot see any Constitutional fix for this problem
Here’s a much simpler 28th dealing with much the same and more:
********************************************
AMENDMENT XXVIII
To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the States and to restore effective suffrage of State Legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:
********************************************
Section 1.
A Member of Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.
Section 2.
The maximum number of terms served by a Member of Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislature but in no case shall exceed three full terms.
Section 3.
Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, specific federal statutes, federal court decisions and executive directives of any form shall be repealed and made void.
Section 4.
The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
*******************************************
A separate amendment for repealing the 16th exists that is simpler but it awaits for a time that is ripe for a return to the gold standard.