Once elections are fixed (made fair) term limits could be bad - it's possible that good people will need longer than a fixed term to raise the next generation, or finish projects of importance, and with free elections why force them out? any corruption could be voted out in secure elections so that is less of a worry. The problem has not been term limits but fraudulent voting keeping people in even when they are terrible.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (52)
sorted by:
I think a better solution is growing the House to more accurately reflect the population. The fucking scum capped the number of House members back in the 20s iirc. It really hasn't changed much since then.
Growing the House beyond 435 members vs doing the shuffle they do each decade would dilute the power of each House member. Congressional districts would be much smaller. I think you'd see an end to the two party stranglehold since it'd become too expensive for any party to maintain a nationwide presence. Most importantly, it'd make it a bigger pain in the ass to pass any legislation.
I also think a bigger House would basically cause higher turnover given the more distributed power. Remove the lavish benefits package and you'd likely have a House that's a better reflection of the population. Nobody sane would make a career out of the House ... That would (hopefully) mean that more people would run for civic duty vs looking to hold a seat for a career.
Party politics is a huge part of the problem. The parties are state-subsidized to a large degree, too, as the state runs the primaries.