Two years x 2 is a total of four. I want my Congressman to have more knowledge of the process than 4 years. If you have a good one you lose them too soon. However 4 years is long enough to decide if they are with their constituents or against. 6 might be optimal. Every two years they have to spend hours getting re-elected. Maybe 3 year term instead of 2 - with 2 term limits?
Yes, representative terms are two years which is not long, but Senate term is 6 years. I agree they spend a lot of time campaigning - too much. I believe campaign reform needs to happen along with term limits so they dont spend half their term on being elected.
People would volunteer their precious time, come to congress work the couple of weeks or month or maybe even a month plus then go home and go back to farming, back to civilian life making money, the honest way.
Plus, our founding fathers realized that anyone in "public service" would want to get back home and pick up their businesses again after their service. Now we have lawyers who have turned being a politician into a real job and they actually have nothing to go home to. With their security clearances they could get lucrative work with MSM, now that is ruined, by Trump, for them.
Exactly right.
Government service was supposed to be like jury duty, not a lifetime career.
Everyone was supposed to be prepared to serve.
That's why Civics class was so important.
Every citizen should understand how the government operates.
A Constitutional Republic is not the same as a democracy.
Government service was supposed to be like jury duty, not a lifetime career.
This is the fundamental principle that needs to be revived and restored, not only in America but in ALL the so-called Western liberal (traditional meaning) democracies.
Most of the forefathers for all intents and purposes. Were Americas version of an Aristocracy. Most of them were wealthy by Colonial Standards. Educated. And typically skilled in something other than legalese and talking in circles. Unlike todays crop of lawyers and career politicians.
I’d hazard a guess the intent or perhaps naive belief was that Congress would largely remain a crème of the crop of American Elite.
As at the country’s founding. Most of the Population both Black and White could not vote. And the funds to campaign for anything higher than a County Election would have been unavailable to most. Which would have largely narrowed the pool of viable candidates down rather drastically.
They probably saw it as a civic duty, like we might see jury duty. You don't really want to be doing that kind of thing, but you will because you love your country and want to do your part. Perhaps it all went to shit when the corporation took over, and being a member of congress meant a salary for life, prestige, the chance of ever greater power, and an insane benefits package that would rile the sweetest of citizens.
They lived in a most difficult time, and found out about issues as they made their new nation successful. I can imagine that as founders they would have a desire to remain vigilant for its well-being. Seems reasonable but who can be certain? Life expectancy may have been a factor, maybe there were not many cases of Alzheimer's. But they did establish the process which must be followed for an amendment to be made. When as a people we get knowledge of the criminality involved, that may remove several amendments we have come to dislike.
Important to realize that there is a double dynamic at place here.
One is career politicians stay in their role for decades, the other is the People signing over responsibility to run things to them.
The swindle is this: all you have to do is "elect" the representative, and your responsibility stops there.
So while the population is lulled into sitting back, letting the career politicians run the city, or state, or country, and focusing on their own affluence, the spirit of civic virtue - serving your community, city, state or nation - is gradually diminished and even (almost) extinguished.
Term limits for congresses (national and state) would mean that members of the community -the people - have a responsibility to put up their hand and serve for a period of time.
This would be the end of career politicians, but its cannot happen unless the People are willing to step up and take real responsibility for self governance.
Trump is the embodiment of that spirit. Sacrificing family, life and time in order to step up and serve the country that has given him so much.
The real key to the current corruption and problem is reviving the spirit of service to one's community/country/state/nation. Every able-bodied adult should be required to offer something for maybe 6 or 8 years of their life to serve in a public role, on one of those levels.
And it's not something you can legally mandate without creating more problems. You cannot force virtue on to people. Thus, the only real solution is a revival of a sacrificial, serving spirit that serves the whole on some level.
That sacrificial serving spirit is at the heart of Christianity, and its why the system of 'democracy' (i.e. a republic with representative self-government) is wholly unsuited to anything but a powerfully religious or spiritually oriented population. As per John Adam's statement.
For America to be great again, the root of the corruption needs to be addressed. Sure, deception was involved, but if you hand over the keys of your house to your servants and then expect them to run the show while you enjoy your personal individual prosperity, don't be surprised when the servants end up swindling you out of the ownership.
This is why civic engagement in self-governance is so critical and crucial to the future of the nation. Without it, removing all the corruption simply will not work. There needs to be a true spirit of love and service to fill the void that the vacated corruption leaves.
One of the challenges then becomes establishing continuity of governance. Because someone jumping in for a term (and only one term) is most definitely going to be limited in experience. So, its a double edged sword. On the one hand, you make it drastically more difficult to establish ongoing pervasive corruption, but on the other hand, you will have the challenge of providing quality governance.
Technically, this means that the civil servants around the elected officials are going to play an important role. We know that the roots of the DS are found in the entrenched civil servants in our modern governments. So that will be one challenge; how to optimize smooth governance while minimizing the ability for civil servants to become too entrenched.
It seems to me that there should also be term limits for civil servants. Something like 10 year. So that they can maintain and pass on knowledge, but not become so entrenched that its a life-long occupation.
I'm not in favor of a single term, but I think that a double term for any elected official should be the limit.
Either way, key to all of the above is drastically reducing the size of government, and releasing all that responsibility back to people themselves.
In the old days, it was faith communities and institutions that primarily looked to the welfare of the wider community. flawed in many ways, because we're human, but because the welfare system was largely 'private sector', they were able to require responsibility of those who received their support.
That's an example of the government NOT being the be all and end all that it has become today. Massive reduction in the size and activity of government is key to taming the beast.
It's not just the people in Congress. Most don't even dream up the laws they propose. It's the people in the background that need to be dropped as well.
Ehhhhhhh competent leadership shouldn't be punished, bad leadership should be held accounted for by being voted out through secure and transparent elections
Absolutely! If in office this long these swamp creatures start think they are rulers over the people. They think they are the elites. Also, the main reason they stay in office this long is because of CHEATING at the voting polls.
Congress should NOT be a lifetime job, ever. It only leads to corruption.
The problem isn't long-serving politicians. The problem is failure to monitor and prosecute politicians who break the law.
If you don't monitor and prosecute bad politicians, it doesn't matter how long they serve -- the difference is a speed-bump for the cabal with no impact whatsoever.
And if Trump somehow is able to serve as POTUS the next 12 years, I'm all for it.
The answer, not term limits, one (1) term. Determine a reasonable amount 2, 4, 6 years, etc. Amend the constitution. Done. Best part, eliminates running for reelection.
We have carear politician as well. I hate them, for they come directly from universities into Parliament, and have only theoretical knowledge. They have no idea what it's like in real life.
Great visual! Sounds like this is the reason why a Presidential 3rd term is being discussed right now. It’s so we talk about the REAL ISSUE which is the length of Senators terms! Too much power for too long would corrupt anyone!
I'll play devil's advocate. In a perfect world without rigged elections, The people keep supporting and voting them back in so why should there be a limit if the people still want them? I can see a few arguments, such as in a world without elite blackmail, term limits would make it easier to oust semi-corrupt people. But in our current world, the elite would replace them with new puppets like they do with Presidents so i doubt it would make much difference.
Term limits might encourage the dishonorable to use their time of influence to build a nest egg and future career for themselves using quid pro quo with taxpayers' dollars. It would be better to limit time spent in certain committees, like banks move their employees around. And fix elections so we can vote out those who are no longer doing their jobs and serving us.
2 term limit on serving in Congress - that is enough.
Add the time these rats “worked” as interns in Washington learning the ropes and it gets much worse.
They are nothing but parasites, same all over the world. The useful idiot front men of the unelected bureaucrat civil service hiding in the shadows.
Two years x 2 is a total of four. I want my Congressman to have more knowledge of the process than 4 years. If you have a good one you lose them too soon. However 4 years is long enough to decide if they are with their constituents or against. 6 might be optimal. Every two years they have to spend hours getting re-elected. Maybe 3 year term instead of 2 - with 2 term limits?
Yes, representative terms are two years which is not long, but Senate term is 6 years. I agree they spend a lot of time campaigning - too much. I believe campaign reform needs to happen along with term limits so they dont spend half their term on being elected.
Can anyone give me a solid Devils advocate reason why the forefathers DIDN'T Include term limits for Congress?
People would volunteer their precious time, come to congress work the couple of weeks or month or maybe even a month plus then go home and go back to farming, back to civilian life making money, the honest way.
They relied on the voters to do that job. A lazy electorate leads to problems.
Plus, our founding fathers realized that anyone in "public service" would want to get back home and pick up their businesses again after their service. Now we have lawyers who have turned being a politician into a real job and they actually have nothing to go home to. With their security clearances they could get lucrative work with MSM, now that is ruined, by Trump, for them.
Exactly right. Government service was supposed to be like jury duty, not a lifetime career. Everyone was supposed to be prepared to serve. That's why Civics class was so important. Every citizen should understand how the government operates. A Constitutional Republic is not the same as a democracy.
This is the fundamental principle that needs to be revived and restored, not only in America but in ALL the so-called Western liberal (traditional meaning) democracies.
You got it.
Most of the forefathers for all intents and purposes. Were Americas version of an Aristocracy. Most of them were wealthy by Colonial Standards. Educated. And typically skilled in something other than legalese and talking in circles. Unlike todays crop of lawyers and career politicians.
I’d hazard a guess the intent or perhaps naive belief was that Congress would largely remain a crème of the crop of American Elite.
As at the country’s founding. Most of the Population both Black and White could not vote. And the funds to campaign for anything higher than a County Election would have been unavailable to most. Which would have largely narrowed the pool of viable candidates down rather drastically.
They probably saw it as a civic duty, like we might see jury duty. You don't really want to be doing that kind of thing, but you will because you love your country and want to do your part. Perhaps it all went to shit when the corporation took over, and being a member of congress meant a salary for life, prestige, the chance of ever greater power, and an insane benefits package that would rile the sweetest of citizens.
That's the truth. People were accountable then.
They lived in a most difficult time, and found out about issues as they made their new nation successful. I can imagine that as founders they would have a desire to remain vigilant for its well-being. Seems reasonable but who can be certain? Life expectancy may have been a factor, maybe there were not many cases of Alzheimer's. But they did establish the process which must be followed for an amendment to be made. When as a people we get knowledge of the criminality involved, that may remove several amendments we have come to dislike.
Like asking the foxes to surrender to the hens.
Important to realize that there is a double dynamic at place here.
One is career politicians stay in their role for decades, the other is the People signing over responsibility to run things to them.
The swindle is this: all you have to do is "elect" the representative, and your responsibility stops there.
So while the population is lulled into sitting back, letting the career politicians run the city, or state, or country, and focusing on their own affluence, the spirit of civic virtue - serving your community, city, state or nation - is gradually diminished and even (almost) extinguished.
Term limits for congresses (national and state) would mean that members of the community -the people - have a responsibility to put up their hand and serve for a period of time.
This would be the end of career politicians, but its cannot happen unless the People are willing to step up and take real responsibility for self governance.
Trump is the embodiment of that spirit. Sacrificing family, life and time in order to step up and serve the country that has given him so much.
The real key to the current corruption and problem is reviving the spirit of service to one's community/country/state/nation. Every able-bodied adult should be required to offer something for maybe 6 or 8 years of their life to serve in a public role, on one of those levels.
And it's not something you can legally mandate without creating more problems. You cannot force virtue on to people. Thus, the only real solution is a revival of a sacrificial, serving spirit that serves the whole on some level.
That sacrificial serving spirit is at the heart of Christianity, and its why the system of 'democracy' (i.e. a republic with representative self-government) is wholly unsuited to anything but a powerfully religious or spiritually oriented population. As per John Adam's statement.
For America to be great again, the root of the corruption needs to be addressed. Sure, deception was involved, but if you hand over the keys of your house to your servants and then expect them to run the show while you enjoy your personal individual prosperity, don't be surprised when the servants end up swindling you out of the ownership.
This is why civic engagement in self-governance is so critical and crucial to the future of the nation. Without it, removing all the corruption simply will not work. There needs to be a true spirit of love and service to fill the void that the vacated corruption leaves.
Good post. This is what we were taught when I was young. At home, at school and in the community.
One of the challenges then becomes establishing continuity of governance. Because someone jumping in for a term (and only one term) is most definitely going to be limited in experience. So, its a double edged sword. On the one hand, you make it drastically more difficult to establish ongoing pervasive corruption, but on the other hand, you will have the challenge of providing quality governance.
Technically, this means that the civil servants around the elected officials are going to play an important role. We know that the roots of the DS are found in the entrenched civil servants in our modern governments. So that will be one challenge; how to optimize smooth governance while minimizing the ability for civil servants to become too entrenched.
It seems to me that there should also be term limits for civil servants. Something like 10 year. So that they can maintain and pass on knowledge, but not become so entrenched that its a life-long occupation.
I'm not in favor of a single term, but I think that a double term for any elected official should be the limit.
Either way, key to all of the above is drastically reducing the size of government, and releasing all that responsibility back to people themselves.
In the old days, it was faith communities and institutions that primarily looked to the welfare of the wider community. flawed in many ways, because we're human, but because the welfare system was largely 'private sector', they were able to require responsibility of those who received their support.
That's an example of the government NOT being the be all and end all that it has become today. Massive reduction in the size and activity of government is key to taming the beast.
They should also be paid by their respective states and no federal funding allowed at all. No retirement none of it.
It's not just the people in Congress. Most don't even dream up the laws they propose. It's the people in the background that need to be dropped as well.
Ehhhhhhh competent leadership shouldn't be punished, bad leadership should be held accounted for by being voted out through secure and transparent elections
Lmao, what competent leadership? Where you been?
Trump. And limits seem to have hurt him imo.
Absolutely! If in office this long these swamp creatures start think they are rulers over the people. They think they are the elites. Also, the main reason they stay in office this long is because of CHEATING at the voting polls.
Congress should NOT be a lifetime job, ever. It only leads to corruption.
I completely 100% disagree.
The problem isn't long-serving politicians. The problem is failure to monitor and prosecute politicians who break the law.
If you don't monitor and prosecute bad politicians, it doesn't matter how long they serve -- the difference is a speed-bump for the cabal with no impact whatsoever.
And if Trump somehow is able to serve as POTUS the next 12 years, I'm all for it.
The answer, not term limits, one (1) term. Determine a reasonable amount 2, 4, 6 years, etc. Amend the constitution. Done. Best part, eliminates running for reelection.
Thats a term limit isn't it?
Technically yes.
We have carear politician as well. I hate them, for they come directly from universities into Parliament, and have only theoretical knowledge. They have no idea what it's like in real life.
Great visual! Sounds like this is the reason why a Presidential 3rd term is being discussed right now. It’s so we talk about the REAL ISSUE which is the length of Senators terms! Too much power for too long would corrupt anyone!
I'd prefer a longer term with no running for re-election, myself.
I'll play devil's advocate. In a perfect world without rigged elections, The people keep supporting and voting them back in so why should there be a limit if the people still want them? I can see a few arguments, such as in a world without elite blackmail, term limits would make it easier to oust semi-corrupt people. But in our current world, the elite would replace them with new puppets like they do with Presidents so i doubt it would make much difference.
100%
Eliminate corruption, and stick with what works.
We can dream...
Harry Reid is dead.
Term limits might encourage the dishonorable to use their time of influence to build a nest egg and future career for themselves using quid pro quo with taxpayers' dollars. It would be better to limit time spent in certain committees, like banks move their employees around. And fix elections so we can vote out those who are no longer doing their jobs and serving us.
Agreed, longest running corporate employees in history. Term limits NOW. That way the cheating doesn't keep them.in amd c9ntrolled for ever.
I’ve been staring at Chuck Schumer since I was a kid.
That's up to the voters. Age has nothing to do with it. Lack of life experience can be a problem also.