The President, Governors and many state legislative positions have term limits.
Why should the House of Representatives and Senate be any different?
Besides receiving salaries much higher than average Americans, politicians are regularly be treated to free lunches and dinners with lobbyists looking to pass their agendas.
Do we really need career politicians any more?
Do we really want men and women in their 90's still in office?
The maximum should be 4 terms for a senator (24 years) and 12 terms for a congressman (24 years).
Even better would be half that 2 terms for a senator (12 years) and 6 terms for a congressman (12 years).
I think Unity '08 should definitely propose to put some term limits on these do nothing politicians!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salaries and Benefits of U.S. Congress Members
Can you believe we pay these nincompoops so much!
And this does not even count all the expenses and other fringe benefits they get that normal U.S. citizens don't...Let's add to that, they have whole staffs of people doing most of their work!!!
Check this link -
http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm
Congress: Rank-and-File Members' Salary
The current salary (2006) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $165,200 per year.
Senate Leadership
Majority Leader - $183,500
Minority Leader - $183,500
House Leadership
Speaker of the House - $212,100
Majority Leader - $183,500
Minority Leader - $183,500
A cost-of-living-adjustment(COLA)increase takes effect annually unless Congress votes to not accept it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree, a Constitutional amendment instating term limits on both houses of congress, and perhaps on the judiciary, should be a plank in the Unity08 platform. I also believe that if 70% of the voters in this country are dissatisfied with our government, we should give them all the boot in 2024.
I, JW Kable, solemnly promise I will not vote for any incumbent, in primary or election, in 2024, no matter how much I may abhor the challenger.
If you would join me, please hit that plus button in the upper right corner. If you do, please keep your promise.
If you would not, please do not hit the minus button. I'm curious to see how many would.
IMHO, 12 years should be max. I had read memoirs of one politician, who said at the end of his life, that after about 10 years professional politician loses touch within the life of the common folks even if he was one of them at the beginning of this term and all that time honestly tried to stay in touch.
Any Amendment to the Constitution must get 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate (Article V) or 2/3 of the States (which has never been done) before it goes through the ratification process. It takes years. Can you imagine career politicians limiting how long they themselves can keep their jobs?
Barry
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you're reading it in English, thank a veteran.
Or 2/3 of the state legislatures. Then ratified by 3/4 of the states. The fed gov't CAN be cut out of the process.
No, I can't, that's why we need to vote them all out. NOW. (Well, in 2024, any way.)
We have Term Limits now - called elections. Let's not abdicate any more of our citizenry responsibilities to an unseeing hand. I think term limit efforts would be better spent in each state in getting enacted an Iowa-like computer demographic reapportionment plan - would cause more turnover than anything.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
We have Term Limits now - called elections. Let's not abdicate any more of our citizenry responsibilities to an unseeing hand. I think term limit efforts would be better spent in each state in getting enacted an Iowa-like computer demographic reapportionment plan - would cause more turnover than anything.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
SENATORS
Same goes with Senators. We should accept our citizenry responsibility and be able to vote in or out whoever we want no matter how wierd, old, stupid, off the wall, etc. Once you start limiting the franchise in any way except minimum age maybe) you abdicate citizenry responsibility to make that all important decision at the ballot box. We get the government we deserve and vote for!
Term Limits on Senators would just accelerate the revolving door into the really cushy power-ladened jobs in DC - K-Street Lobbyists, Special Interests. They would just find their way there earlier in the game to working one-tenth the hours at ten times the Senatorial wages. Nothing would change with Term Limits on Senatorsn or anybody else for that matter. Would be great feel-good stuff for us all but nothing would really change JW.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Same goes with Senators. We should accept our citizenry responsibility and be able to vote in or out whoever we want no matter how wierd, old, stupid, off the wall, etc. Once you start limiting the franchise in any way except minimum age maybe) you abdicate citizenry responsibility to make that all important decision at the ballot box. We get the government we deserve and vote for!
Term Limits on Senators would just accelerate the revolving door into the really cushy power-ladened jobs in DC - K-Street Lobbyists, Special Interests. They would just find their way there earlier in the game to working one-tenth the hours at ten times the Senatorial wages. Nothing would change with Term Limits on Senatorsn or anybody else for that matter. Would be great feel-good stuff for us all but nothing would really change JW.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
The fundamental critique I'd make in asserting that elections are the term limit, is that such an assertion presumes that the incumbent is easily challenged. This line of thinking ignores the problem that most incumbents are insulated from realistic challenge by huge amounts of money. The perception of choice is thereby more perception than it is reality. The more secure they are in their position the more corruption they seem to perpetrate. Fritz Hollings of SC was a good example of this. He comes to mind being that I'm a person that works in the tech world.
While I can concede that this would be less of a problem if people took it upon themselves to be aware of what their reps are up to, and when they should get the boot, the fact is that no democratic civilization, to my knowledge, has ever really been close to this. Every single democratic nation claims it, of course, but in reality there are some very efficient mechanisms at play in which the incumbent, almost by name recognition alone, can continually win.
The reason I have thought favorably of term limits is that it prevents elected officials from developing an aristocratic sort of thinking. By that I imply that those who feel they can never be contested will drift away from the people they represent and towards those who line their pockets.
Unity08 and our interest in it is very much based upon this disconnect; that the powers that be just treat democracy as a manageable problem, not as a cherished institution. Term limits at least creates a "kill switch" to a situation that otherwise only seems to have one in theory. It doesn't guarantee a the quality of a successor, but it at least does guarantee that there will be more that one in my life time. I'm from the school of thought that there are MANY people that can do the job and do it better, and that they should have a (realistic) shot of at least running.
In any case, I doubt that term limits are within reach at the federal level, so it's probably a moot point, but fun to talk about.
-GP
Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://www.unity-usa.org
Voting for change is the best term limit there is - and it is the only term limit we need.
Jeff C
leikec@yahoo.com