Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Exploring Term Limits

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Exploring Term Limits

    CP and I see eye-to-eye on relatively few things, but Term Limits is one of them. The subject came up in another thread, and Terraceth asked:

    Have term limits actually been shown to fix these problems? I'm legitimately curious.


    I frankly don't know the answer to this. CP then responded by noting he also didn't know an answer or how one would prove this. He then provided an interesting link to a Brookings Institute article against term limits.

    Starlight then posted this thought-provoking response:

    My country has no term limits, and I don't recall ever hearing anybody here even suggest them... and we nonetheless rank as a contender for best-functioning democracy in the world. (And of the top 10 democracies on that list, not a single one has term limits for their politicians - 2 of the 10 have a ceremonial position that is term limited but no term limits on the executive authority roles) So I am deeply skeptical that term limits would actually achieve the positive outcomes that their advocates in the US think they would.

    In my own experience, the single biggest democratic improvement in my lifetime - by far and away - was when my country changed the voting system away from plurality voting. It resulted in us going from 2 parties to 7 parties in the course of one election to the next. It meant politicians could no longer say to their base "you have to hold your nose and vote for me, because I'm not as bad as the other guy" and instead they had to convince their base they were better than representatives of other parties on their own part of the political spectrum. Politicians had to compete to be the best, not compete to be the 2nd-worst.

    In the US, the voting system for federal elections is controlled by individual states. Maine has recently adopted Ranked Choice voting (aka Instant Runoff), which is a very good method IMO (we use it here for local elections, but IMO it's better for national elections than local ones as it works better the more people know about more of the candidates and in local elections you often don't know much about a lot of the candidates). At a theoretical level, STAR voting seems to be about the best possible voting system, although as far as I am aware it hasn't been implemented anywhere in practice.

    I believe changing the US voting systems to either of these methods would actually fix the problems that advocates of 'term limits' are seeking to address, but I doubt term limits would fix those same problems.


    So - this is the thread devoted to discussing the issue. Term limits. Good idea? Bad idea? I'm finding myself rethinking my position.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  • #2
    I have no idea if it would be effective or not; However, it does mimic the kind of "up-or-out" ruthlessness of the military, or the ancient Roman Courses Honorum for modern life - the series of public service positions held by Roman politicians. I'd rather see Citizen's United rolled back though, because if you don't, it won't matter if we have career politicians being constantly bribed by corporations if all we get is a rotating series of pols bribed by corporations.
    "Down in the lowlands, where the water is deep,
    Hear my cry, hear my shout,
    Save me, save me"

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm confused on how allowing more candidates to truly run for the position fixes the cronyism, and issues created by lobbying/PAC support....maybe you or Star could expound on that?

      I see term limits as the idea that Government/Public Service is not meant to be a lifetime thing. Power is a corrupting force and those who stay in power get more corrupt ISTM. I'm not sure term limits fix that problem, but at least it will limit it to some degree.
      "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

      "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

      Comment


      • #4
        I think we need a compromise between short term limits and no term limits. Give them enough time to get a feel for legislating and get some work done, but not so long as they become too comfortable. The current term is 6 years for the Senate and 2 years for the House. I say give them a max of around 15 years, so 2 or 3 terms for Senate and around 8 for the house. Then kick em out.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by guacamole View Post
          I have no idea if it would be effective or not; However, it does mimic the kind of "up-or-out" ruthlessness of the military, or the ancient Roman Courses Honorum for modern life - the series of public service positions held by Roman politicians. I'd rather see Citizen's United rolled back though, because if you don't, it won't matter if we have career politicians being constantly bribed by corporations if all we get is a rotating series of pols bribed by corporations.
          We definitely agree on Citizens United. I'd love to have you explain it to Seer!
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
            I'm confused on how allowing more candidates to truly run for the position fixes the cronyism, and issues created by lobbying/PAC support....maybe you or Star could expound on that?

            I see term limits as the idea that Government/Public Service is not meant to be a lifetime thing. Power is a corrupting force and those who stay in power get more corrupt ISTM. I'm not sure term limits fix that problem, but at least it will limit it to some degree.
            Well, I'm not sure how well it would combat cronyism. I think the only way to combat cronyism is to have some form of approval process for any appointed positions in government that would seek for and eliminate cronyism. I'm not sure how you would implement that. I have long thought Term Limits would primarily fight against "protect my flank" voting. Today, is a politician is going to face re-election, they are strongly influenced by whether or not they are going to be primaried in their own district/state. They tend not to vote their conscience and instead vote for whatever is most likely to get them re-elected. With big money in politics, that basically means aligning with whoever has the most $. So the NRA has major power because it has major $, despite the fact that the majority of their positions are NOT supported by the majority of Americans.

            And then there is the "incumbent usually wins" issue, reducing churn and fresh blood in the Senate.

            If the Senate and a 2-term limit, however, Every election cycle would see (on average), two types of candidates:

            - seats that are open because the incumbent cannot run again, so the two parties are squaring off and both have true primaries
            - seats that have an incumbent running for their second term.

            The former favors new blood. The latter helps with "corporate memory," so we don't have a Senate full of rookies every election cycle. The Senate is less of a concern about corporate memory because of the six year term and staggered elections. The house, however, needs to have a 8-year to 12-year limits to strike the balance between "fresh blood" and "retained corporate memory," because every seat is up for reelection every 2 years.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              I think we need a compromise between short term limits and no term limits. Give them enough time to get a feel for legislating and get some work done, but not so long as they become too comfortable. The current term is 6 years for the Senate and 2 years for the House. I say give them a max of around 15 years, so 2 or 3 terms for Senate and around 8 for the house. Then kick em out.
              I've leaned towards 12 years (2 terms in the Senate, 6 terms in the house), but it's not based on any science. 15 might work as well, though it creates an odd boundary given the 6-year terms in the Senate. It seems to me 12 or 18 years would be cleaner.
              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                I've leaned towards 12 years (2 terms in the Senate, 6 terms in the house), but it's not based on any science. 15 might work as well, though it creates an odd boundary given the 6-year terms in the Senate. It seems to me 12 or 18 years would be cleaner.
                Yeah

                Why is the house only 2 years, by the way?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  Yeah

                  Why is the house only 2 years, by the way?
                  found this:

                  The simplest explanation for why the members of the House of Representatives are chosen every two years is that it is mandated in the Constitution. The Constitution explicitly states in Article I, Section 2 that representatives be chosen every two years. Unlike the Senate, in which members serve for six years and one-third of senators run for election every two years, the entire House of Representatives is up every two years. The framers of the Constitution felt that frequent elections would cause House members to have more interaction with and be more responsive to their constituents by having them return home to run for election every other year.
                  https://classroom.synonym.com/electi...ars-12375.html

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    found this:

                    The simplest explanation for why the members of the House of Representatives are chosen every two years is that it is mandated in the Constitution. The Constitution explicitly states in Article I, Section 2 that representatives be chosen every two years. Unlike the Senate, in which members serve for six years and one-third of senators run for election every two years, the entire House of Representatives is up every two years. The framers of the Constitution felt that frequent elections would cause House members to have more interaction with and be more responsive to their constituents by having them return home to run for election every other year.
                    https://classroom.synonym.com/electi...ars-12375.html
                    Makes sense...
                    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                      I'm confused on how allowing more candidates to truly run for the position fixes the cronyism, and issues created by lobbying/PAC support....maybe you or Star could expound on that?

                      I see term limits as the idea that Government/Public Service is not meant to be a lifetime thing. Power is a corrupting force and those who stay in power get more corrupt ISTM. I'm not sure term limits fix that problem, but at least it will limit it to some degree.
                      Yeah, I've always been comfortable with the term "citizen legislator", and thought that was part of the founding fathers' intent.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        Yeah

                        Why is the house only 2 years, by the way?
                        I would think it's because they wanted those representatives to be more answerable to the people in their districts, having to stay in touch with them, and being subject to removal if they didn't actually represent the people, instead of their own self interests.

                        ETA: Then I saw Sparko's post, so, yeah, that's gotta be it!
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          Yeah, I've always been comfortable with the term "citizen legislator", and thought that was part of the founding fathers' intent.
                          Source: Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus


                          Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, (born 519? BCE), Roman statesman who gained fame for his selfless devotion to the republic in times of crisis and for giving up the reins of power when the crisis was over. Although he was a historical figure, his career has been much embellished by legend.

                          The core of the tradition holds that in 458 Cincinnatus was appointed dictator of Rome in order to rescue a consular army that was surrounded by the Aequi on Mount Algidus. At the time of his appointment he was working a small farm. He is said to have defeated the enemy in a single day and celebrated a triumph in Rome. Cincinnatus maintained his authority only long enough to bring Rome through the emergency. He then resigned and returned to his farm. Most scholars see no factual truth in the further tradition that Cincinnatus was given a second dictatorship in 439 to check the monarchical ambitions of Spurius Maelius. Once again, he is supposed to have ceded his power after ending the crisis.



                          Source

                          © Copyright Original Source


                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            Source: Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus


                            Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, (born 519? BCE), Roman statesman who gained fame for his selfless devotion to the republic in times of crisis and for giving up the reins of power when the crisis was over. Although he was a historical figure, his career has been much embellished by legend.

                            The core of the tradition holds that in 458 Cincinnatus was appointed dictator of Rome in order to rescue a consular army that was surrounded by the Aequi on Mount Algidus. At the time of his appointment he was working a small farm. He is said to have defeated the enemy in a single day and celebrated a triumph in Rome. Cincinnatus maintained his authority only long enough to bring Rome through the emergency. He then resigned and returned to his farm. Most scholars see no factual truth in the further tradition that Cincinnatus was given a second dictatorship in 439 to check the monarchical ambitions of Spurius Maelius. Once again, he is supposed to have ceded his power after ending the crisis.



                            Source

                            © Copyright Original Source

                            So, yeah, the other part of the citizen legislator is that they have to go home and live under the laws they enacted just like everybody else.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Maybe make it that politicians should be required to have degrees (at least) in relevant fields before they are permitted to stand for election - with the CV made available. Naaah - that's only for people who want real jobs.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              6 responses
                              45 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              42 responses
                              230 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              24 responses
                              104 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Ronson
                              by Ronson
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              32 responses
                              176 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              73 responses
                              286 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X