I believe in Term Limits

President, 3 terms of 4 years each, 12 years total
Senator, 2 terms of 6 years each, 12 years total
Congressional Representatives, 6 terms of 2 years each, 12 years total
Supreme Court Judge, 12 years from date of being seated and beginning of the 1st court term.

Everybody gets 12 years at most and then out.

Most states now gerrymander so as to create as many safe (and highly partisan) Democratic and republican seats as possible. Good for incumbents, bad for people who want to see a clash of ideas and competitive elections. In many gerrymandered districts the primary is the real election, since only one party has a realistic chance to win the general election.

If someone can win a competitive bipartisan district more than once, more power to him or her.

along with Barbara Boxer. The voters have the power to limit terms if all districts were competitive for challengers.

plus Justice Stevens would have been out 23 years ago?

Who would you want coaching your favorite basketball team?

Jeff Bzdelik

or Coach K?

If you or someone you cared about was being operated on, wouldn't you want the surgeon to be as experienced as possible?

Besides, lobbyists would get even more power since they would be the permanent power brokers.

And some would get around it by having flunkies succeed them, a la Lurleen Wallace.

The President is a possible exception since that job tends to warp minds and the amount of power is has is a bit frightening.

but the problem here is the routine itself is nothing more than self preservation for the incumbent - and yes, you're right, the longer they stay the harder they become to dislodge.

it takes so much money to get re-elected that congress spends all their time pandering to lobbyist to get their money they forget about the people who elected them. TERM LIMITS IS THE ONLY WAY TO BRING CONGRESS BACK TO NORMAL. And I think 12 years is too much 8 should be the limit.

And the bureaucrats. And the pundits, too. Ever notice how they go "this President" like they are implying that THEY are always there, but Presidents and Congresspersons come and go?

The bureaucrats would become all powerful. Congress would be polarized and never pass anything new, and the bureaucrats would be the only ones who know what is going on.

totally agree.

We have the opportunity to vote out our public officials at any election. If we choose to keep them in then that is out free decision as voters. Term limits are anathema to true democracy, and I despise them utterly.

I'm not sure it would solve the problems to have a lot of newbies in Congress, though. Progressives complain it cannot get legislation through as it is. A lot of newbies would be polarizing. When they are there for long years they make friends and there are chances they can work together.

All it would do is paralyze Congress and the latest polarized candidates all were getting their 60 minutes of fame. Congress would be full of Rands and Palins - the newest flavor of the month would be there.

The old system of entrenched individuals has been largely replaced by one of Heirs Apparent.

I rather have people in office who know what they're doing

I never thought much of term limits as I believe that it should be the voters who decide if a person is worthy to continue serving and that the seniority system does have it benefits as it keeps a consistency to the ebb and flow of government. We can discuss the effects on that ebb and flow, but recharging representatives every couple years means a constant flux in those with knowledge of long term and complex issues that could be a disadvantage to the "little guy" in the long run.

I'd be more interested in people's thoughts about age limits. Is there an age where someone's physical condition and/or decreased mental capacities make it all but impossible for them to adequately serve their consituents. I'll use Senator Robert Byrd as an example. I admire the man, his knowledge and years of leadership, however at his advanced age, how much service does he really provide for the folks of West Virginia. I know this is a sticky wicket as I can also look at a John Dingell at 88 who is still very much in the game and an effective legislator. The question gets even stickier when we look at life time appointements like judges. Thus should age be a factor?

Veteran state lawmakers that learned to hone their skill working with their adversaries across the aisle are long gone. Stalemate, stagnation and dysfunction is what we have left.

Henry Clay didn't master the great compromise overnight.

assuming that president won 3 terms


your system is insane, sorry.


2 4 year terms for President works.


lifetime for SCOTUS works too, but a 25 or 30 year limit might be reasonable.


I can't argue with your term limits for congress. I could get on board with those.

Sacramento is a daily circus of incompetent and corrupt twits herded about by big money lobbyists.

There are many competent people in Sacramento but they are often overpowered by the shit throwing screaming monkey short-timers.

:thumbsup: