Posted: 8/18/2009 6:12:24 PM EDT
|
It seems that at one time, the state legislatures chose the Federal reps that were sent to Washington.
Since we know that Congresscritters are not going to vote term limits on themselves, is it possible that states could impose term limits on their particular Federal reps? |
|
Quoted:
One of the biggest blows to state's rights was the direct election of senators. Its all been downhill from there. Agreed. When the senators were picked by the states legislatures they were there to look out for there states. If they didn't they were shit canned and someone else was put in their place. The 17th amendment eliminated that. Now we have prima donna's that are looking out for themselves and their power instead of their states |
|
Lack of Terms limits isnt the problem. you could replace every memebr of congress every term, and little would change. This is due to the gerrymandered disctricts. If you want REAL change make all congressional districts as compact and contiguous as possible, with no regard for race/sex/party affiliation. |
|
Quoted:
Lack of Terms limits isnt the problem. you could replace every memebr of congress every term, and little would change. This is due to the gerrymandered disctricts. If you want REAL change make all congressional districts as compact and contiguous as possible, with no regard for race/sex/party affiliation. Term limits would have a positive impact on DC. The longer a politician stays there, the more entrenched he gets with private interest groups and the more in debt to the political currency game. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Lack of Terms limits isnt the problem. you could replace every memebr of congress every term, and little would change. This is due to the gerrymandered disctricts. If you want REAL change make all congressional districts as compact and contiguous as possible, with no regard for race/sex/party affiliation. Term limits would have a positive impact on DC. The longer a politician stays there, the more entrenched he gets with private interest groups and the more in debt to the political currency game. I disagree, term limits would increase the power of the special interests. People with limited time would have more incentive to get 'as much as they can' while in congress. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lack of Terms limits isnt the problem. you could replace every memebr of congress every term, and little would change. This is due to the gerrymandered disctricts. If you want REAL change make all congressional districts as compact and contiguous as possible, with no regard for race/sex/party affiliation. Term limits would have a positive impact on DC. The longer a politician stays there, the more entrenched he gets with private interest groups and the more in debt to the political currency game. I disagree, term limits would increase the power of the special interests. People with limited time would have more incentive to get 'as much as they can' while in congress. You don't think that is already the case? |
|
Quoted: You don't think that is already the case? I agree that it is the case. I disagree that term limits will be the answer. If anything term limits alone will simply exacerbate that problem. People with nothing to lose tend to act as if there are few consequences to their actions. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lack of Terms limits isnt the problem. you could replace every memebr of congress every term, and little would change. This is due to the gerrymandered disctricts. If you want REAL change make all congressional districts as compact and contiguous as possible, with no regard for race/sex/party affiliation. Term limits would have a positive impact on DC. The longer a politician stays there, the more entrenched he gets with private interest groups and the more in debt to the political currency game. I disagree, term limits would increase the power of the special interests. People with limited time would have more incentive to get 'as much as they can' while in congress. I disagree for one, because that's what's happening now and the career politicians have had decades to form cozy relationships with their patrons. If congress was composed of people who didn't have the luxury of sitting in the same seat for 20 years, they would be more focused on getting work done and not furthering their own interests. I'm also of the belief that there should be high turnover in Congress, simply for the fact that you don't have people like Ted Kennedy or Pelosi or Boxer who have made a career out of "serving" in congress. Do you really think that after 43 years of wining and dining in the highest circles of power, Teddy has the same level of focus on his constituents that a freshman senator might? Being in Congress should be a great honor and a privledge, but it should not be a golden ticket to power and prosperity. |
|
A. We have term limits. They're called regularly scheduled elections. Stop crying about the bastards staying in office and see that they're removed.
B. Duh! We want some of them to stay. C. Demand and end to government funded campaigns and an end to "election reform". |
|
I haven't finished the book yet but its pretty good & makes you wonder if it could happen today...the book by Vince Flynn "Term Limits" Term Limits
Ooops my bad...wrong term limits. 
7mm |
|
Quoted:
I haven't finished the book yet but its pretty good & makes you wonder if it could happen today...the book by Vince Flynn "Term Limits" Term Limits Ooops my bad...wrong term limits.
7mm Good book! |