- Joined
- Jul 20, 2005
- Messages
- 20,688
- Reaction score
- 7,320
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Seems reasonable.Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.
Also seems reasonable.Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
One of the big problems in our country are career politicians. I don't really see this amendment getting passed, because that would require the politicians on The Hill to think about whats best for their constituents, and not whats best for them.
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?
Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.
Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
Yes, but I would add SCOTUS term limits also. And I wouldn't allow Grandfather clause exceptions.
Limit Congressman to 4 terms of 2 years per term.
That's a lot of time wasted on campaigning and raising money when they should be working for their constituents.
One of the big problems in our country are career politicians. I don't really see this amendment getting passed, because that would require the politicians on The Hill to think about whats best for their constituents, and not whats best for them.
I say yes but minus the grandfather clause.Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?
Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.
Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?
Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of Senator for a full term more than twice, and no person who has held the office of Senator for more than two years shall be elected to the office of Senator more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Senator when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Senator.
Section 2.
No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more than four times. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of Representative when this Article was ratified by the States, for as long as that person continuously holds the office of Representative.
I oppose term limits as I feel they limit the choice of voters.
I oppose term limits as I feel they limit the choice of voters.
I say yes but minus the grandfather clause.
There's no way it could ever be adopted by Congress without the grandfather clause.
Do you honestly think any of them would even support it with the grandfather clause in it?
A few reasons.
One of them is specific to the legislature: a person's vote in Minnesota affects me here in Virginia, even though I do not get to vote for Minnesota's Congressional representation. Human nature is, people are going to want a powerful representative to make their state more powerful than the rest. The best way to do this is to keep voting people in office until they have a lot of seniority. Term limits would equalize the power in Congress.
Then there's the fact that incumbents have a huge advantage in elections, both in fund raising and in name-recognition. This is also true because a party wants to keep its power, and is afraid that tough primary competition will weaken their chances of keeping their hold. Places represented by the majority party have significantly higher incumbency rates than other places.
You oppose presidential term limits?
Yes, though not enough that I would really push to eliminate them. I don't like messing with the constitution any more than absolutely necessary.
Would you support this amendment to the US Constitution?…
Term limits have the effect of transfering power from the legislators to the professional staffers.
Chappy said:Personally, I think people who advocate term limits hate and wish to undermine republican government.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?