• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Term Limits

Nalen

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
I was talking to my sister about lobbyists and big business and the fact that elected officials weigh the effect of their actions on their next election. I argued for term limits but my sister said that they can't get anything done in California for several reasons -- one being term limits and the fact that their officials turn over too quickly and the other being the legislature passed years ago I think related to Prop 13 that requires a 3/4 majority to pass legislation.

What are the pros and cons of term limits do you think?

R2 i honestly do not see a downfall of having term limits in the House and Senate. None. Only 2 terms. Period. Because eventually they lose touch with reality and do not see what is actually happening out in the real world to the people who they are supposed to be speaking for. Power Corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And then at the end of their term every year they shall be investigated to see if anything they have done raises any eyebrows and the people in their district vote wether or not to prosecute their supposed rep. if anything is found.
 

Triangle Bar

Well-known member
Ted Kennedy, RIP, was the poster boy for term limits. He made a career of being a Senator. It's impossible for me to believe that no one else, regardless of party, from his state didn't have new ideas or a fresh perspective, that would have been beneficial to those constituents.

We need term limits. If Senators were limited to serve 2 terms and Reps. served 2 or 3 terms, that would give Senators 12 years and Reps. 4 to 6 years of service. That's more than enough time for them to work on whatever issues they ran on during election season. If they can't, then they didn't go there to work but other reasons other than service.

Service, is the key word here. Service to their country & to their constituents, not to their ego or their political aspirations.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I've always been a strong proponent of term limits- but just to play Devils advocate-- in some of the states where they have implemented them, I've talked to several current and former Legislators that say it takes at least one term just to learn your way around- along with all the rules and protocol- and gain the ability necessary to file bills and resolutions...
They said with all the varying issues it makes you much more dependent on the advice of your fellow legislators, legislative attorneys, and special interest lobbyiests....

And I would imagine on the national level- with all the more complex issues facing the lawmakers there that would be even more so...

Not sure I want to put more dependency on the attorneys, and lobbyiests...
 

Triangle Bar

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I've always been a strong proponent of term limits- but just to play Devils advocate-- in some of the states where they have implemented them, I've talked to several current and former Legislators that say it takes at least one term just to learn your way around- along with all the rules and protocol- and gain the ability necessary to file bills and resolutions...

In other words....it takes a while to learn the good old boy system, which hand greases which, and the best ways to hold out till you sell your vote for the best price.

These folks can rely on seasoned staff & those of reputable non-allied opinions for advice, if need be. That being said, why are we electing these folks? It's for their leadership abilities. If they need a term before they can take off their training wheels....they better look for another line of work.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Triangle Bar said:
Oldtimer said:
I've always been a strong proponent of term limits- but just to play Devils advocate-- in some of the states where they have implemented them, I've talked to several current and former Legislators that say it takes at least one term just to learn your way around- along with all the rules and protocol- and gain the ability necessary to file bills and resolutions...

In other words....it takes a while to learn the good old boy system, which hand greases which, and the best ways to hold out till you sell your vote for the best price.

These folks can rely on seasoned staff & those of reputable non-allied opinions for advice, if need be. That being said, why are we electing these folks? It's for their leadership abilities. If they need a term before they can take off their training wheels....they better look for another line of work.

Well- if you want a legislature made up of attorneys experienced in writing/interpreting law- or in lobbying- they probably have the experience :???: ....But how many common main street businessmen, housewives, or farmer/ranchers have spent enough time in Congress or working with all the varying laws to know all the operations and legal twists to all those varied issues... :???:

I spent several years going back and forth to the State Legislature in Helena when I was a board member with the Sheriffs and Peace Officers Assn- and learned dozens of new things every trip- and never left that place amazed that anything got accomplished....

Like I said- I support term limits- BUT- will we only get attorneys to run- or people wealthy enough to put their business/professional life on hold for 4-8 years- and then be able to come back to pick it up.... :???:

I don't know what the answer is...One would be to outlaw all lobbyiest money/campaign donations, so the Congressmen couldn't be so bought out-- - but in the arguments I heard last week in front of the Supreme Court-and Judge Roberts comments in return- it sounds like the court may just go the opposite way- and throw out 100+ years precedence and say that Corporate entities have the same 1st Amendment rights as an individual-- and can openly donate as much money as they want to a candidate....
If that happens- the example used was- conceivably the Insurance Industry or Big Oil could totally bankroll the entire campaign of the next Presidential candidate or virtually "buy" the next open Senate or House seat....
And it brings up a lot of questions about foreign money as many of these corporate entities are heavily or totally owned by people/entities in other countries.....
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Like I said- I support term limits- BUT- will we only get attorneys to run- or people wealthy enough to put their business/professional life on hold for 4-8 years- and then be able to come back to pick it up.... :???:

I don't know what the answer is...One would be to outlaw all lobbyiest money/campaign donations, so the Congressmen couldn't be so bought out-- - but in the arguments I heard last week in front of the Supreme Court-and Judge Roberts comments in return- it sounds like the court may just go the opposite way- and throw out 100+ years precedence and say that Corporate entities have the same 1st Amendment rights as an individual-- and can openly donate as much money as they want to a candidate....
If that happens- the example used was- conceivably the Insurance Industry or Big Oil could totally bankroll the entire campaign of the next Presidential candidate or variabley "buy" the next open Senate or House seat....
And it brings up a lot of questions about foreign money as many of these corporate entities are heavily or totally owned by people/entities in other countries.....


The above seems like someone is fearmongering...........eh?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
loomixguy said:
Oldtimer said:
Like I said- I support term limits- BUT- will we only get attorneys to run- or people wealthy enough to put their business/professional life on hold for 4-8 years- and then be able to come back to pick it up.... :???:

I don't know what the answer is...One would be to outlaw all lobbyiest money/campaign donations, so the Congressmen couldn't be so bought out-- - but in the arguments I heard last week in front of the Supreme Court-and Judge Roberts comments in return- it sounds like the court may just go the opposite way- and throw out 100+ years precedence and say that Corporate entities have the same 1st Amendment rights as an individual-- and can openly donate as much money as they want to a candidate....
If that happens- the example used was- conceivably the Insurance Industry or Big Oil could totally bankroll the entire campaign of the next Presidential candidate or variabley "buy" the next open Senate or House seat....
And it brings up a lot of questions about foreign money as many of these corporate entities are heavily or totally owned by people/entities in other countries.....


The above seems like someone is fearmongering...........eh?

NOPE-- nothing yellow running down my leg...Just relating the examples the attorneys on C-SPAN analyzing the case were giving- and what the Justices were using as opposing arguments....
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
I was talking to my sister about lobbyists and big business and the fact that elected officials weigh the effect of their actions on their next election. I argued for term limits but my sister said that they can't get anything done in California for several reasons -- one being term limits and the fact that their officials turn over too quickly and the other being the legislature passed years ago I think related to Prop 13 that requires a 3/4 majority to pass legislation.

What are the pros and cons of term limits do you think?

I've been all over the place on term limits.....in favor of them at one point in my life and against them at others.

I guess what it really boils down to for me is that if a guy's (gal's) constituents are happy with them, then let 'em stay in office.

I recall some of my conservative buddies blasting John Kerry for being a career politician (among other things) and even though I didn't vote for the guy, I pointed out that he'd have probably made a heck of a lot more money if he'd gone into private business as a young man instead of serving his state for so many years.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I've always been a strong proponent of term limits- but just to play Devils advocate-- in some of the states where they have implemented them, I've talked to several current and former Legislators that say it takes at least one term just to learn your way around- along with all the rules and protocol- and gain the ability necessary to file bills and resolutions...They said with all the varying issues it makes you much more dependent on the advice of your fellow legislators, legislative attorneys, and special interest lobbyiests....

And I would imagine on the national level- with all the more complex issues facing the lawmakers there that would be even more so...

Not sure I want to put more dependency on the attorneys, and lobbyiests...


Got to love it It takes at least one term to learn the ropes. :lol: Oldtimer how long was Obama in the Senate before he ran for President? Could that be why he seems to need Czar/advisors on every issue he has to deal with? :?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
I've always been a strong proponent of term limits- but just to play Devils advocate-- in some of the states where they have implemented them, I've talked to several current and former Legislators that say it takes at least one term just to learn your way around- along with all the rules and protocol- and gain the ability necessary to file bills and resolutions...They said with all the varying issues it makes you much more dependent on the advice of your fellow legislators, legislative attorneys, and special interest lobbyiests....

And I would imagine on the national level- with all the more complex issues facing the lawmakers there that would be even more so...

Not sure I want to put more dependency on the attorneys, and lobbyiests...


Got to love it It takes at least one term to learn the ropes. :lol: Oldtimer how long was Obama in the Senate before he ran for President? Could that be why he seems to need Czar/advisors on every issue he has to deal with? :?

And an attorney- that has taught constitutional law... Lot of difference between making law- and enforcing/administrating the laws on the books...I know of no job that gives OJT for the Presidents job...Some have said that being Governor of a major state prepares you--but GW shot that old theory all to Hell... :roll:

I'm very happy that Obama is surrounding himself with lots of advisors- and looking at advice from all directions... In this complicated world no one can be an expert in all fields... (Except possibly you- seeing as how you put down all your fellow countrymen for their lack of healthcare knowledge- even those personally involved and working in the field) :roll: :wink: :p
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
OT, you mentioned something earlier in this thread that I got blasted on many years ago when I relayed the conversation to some buddies.....the subject of average citizens leaving their businesses to serve for a term or two....which is probably something along the lines of what our founding fathers had in mind, citizen politicians, not politicians for life.

Anyway, the radio program subject was pay raises for politicans and term limits. I recall telling the guy via telephone......Combs.....the guy who later worked with Hannity on television it was, that I'd be in favor of huge pay raises for politicans if they'd also limit their terms.

My idea was that the huge pay raise part was something to entice someone to leave their business for 2 to 4 years to serve their country in the legislature.

Of course, I was making the assumption that a wise and successful businessman would be a good politician, which isn't necessarily the case.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Whitewing said:
OT, you mentioned something earlier in this thread that I got blasted on many years ago when I relayed the conversation to some buddies.....the subject of average citizens leaving their businesses to serve for a term or two....which is probably something along the lines of what our founding fathers had in mind, citizen politicians, not politicians for life.

Anyway, the radio program subject was pay raises for politicans and term limits. I recall telling the guy via telephone......Combs.....the guy who later worked with Hannity on television it was, that I'd be in favor of huge pay raises for politicans if they'd also limit their terms.

My idea was that the huge pay raise part was something to entice someone to leave their business for 2 to 4 years to serve their country in the legislature.

Of course, I was making the assumption that a wise and successful businessman would be a good politician, which isn't necessarily the case.

I agree- when you compare the importance of their jobs- to those in the private sector, I'd say the Congressmen have much more responsibility-- but the compensation is no where near the same (except for the above the table and under the table perks)...

I also prefer totally publicly funded campaigns with maximum limits on what any candidate can spend (only public funds can be used) so that a wealthy person- or person backed by a well funded PAC warchest can't buy an election...But the SCOTUS has already ruled that unconstitutional...And a limit on how long before the election they can begin campaigning...
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
I've always been a strong proponent of term limits- but just to play Devils advocate-- in some of the states where they have implemented them, I've talked to several current and former Legislators that say it takes at least one term just to learn your way around- along with all the rules and protocol- and gain the ability necessary to file bills and resolutions...They said with all the varying issues it makes you much more dependent on the advice of your fellow legislators, legislative attorneys, and special interest lobbyiests....

And I would imagine on the national level- with all the more complex issues facing the lawmakers there that would be even more so...

Not sure I want to put more dependency on the attorneys, and lobbyiests...


Got to love it It takes at least one term to learn the ropes. :lol: Oldtimer how long was Obama in the Senate before he ran for President? Could that be why he seems to need Czar/advisors on every issue he has to deal with? :?

And an attorney- that has taught constitutional law... Lot of difference between making law- and enforcing/administrating the laws on the books...I know of no job that gives OJT for the Presidents job...Some have said that being Governor of a major state prepares you--but GW shot that old theory all to Hell... :roll:

I'm very happy that Obama is surrounding himself with lots of advisors- and looking at advice from all directions... In this complicated world no one can be an expert in all fields... (Except possibly you- seeing as how you put down all your fellow countrymen for their lack of healthcare knowledge- even those personally involved and working in the field) :roll: :wink: :p

He's an attorney, well that explains why there will be no tort reform in the health care bill. He would want to p**s his fellow attorneys off now would he OLDTIMER?


He has taught constitutional law but yet he goes to court and pays hundreds of thousands of dollars to make sure he doesn't have to prove he is Constitutionally qualifies to set as President.

It is who he is surrounding himself that you should be concerned or do you want your cattle and horses to have the right to sue you. Or maybe you like the idea of feeding the population sterilants through their drinking water. :roll: :roll:

And gee another personal attack what a SURPRISE. :roll:
 
Top