How come no one talks about term limits anymore??

[killerbush]

Remember when Democrats used to control things in Washington? All the Republicans would talk about, other than impeaching Bill Clinton, was term limits. They all said that Democrats were in office too long, and we needed term limits to kick them out. It was all the rage.

Well, where is the talk now? I have not heard a single Republican who wants to talk about term limits. Most surprisingly however is that Democrats don't really want to talk about it either. I knew that this was a phony issue, and now I'm even more convinced than ever that it's a phony issue.

[depakid]

1. Same reason they aren't rabid for a balanced budget Amendment

They never believed it in the first place.

We're not talking about people with even a sliver of honesty or integrity here....

[Minnesota Libra]

2. Diebold makes "term limits" or any "limits" a mute issue these days.......

....but I don't think that should cause us to give up. Instead it should unite this country behind curing what ills our elections so that "we the people" will again have a voice.

[Warpy]

3. "We got in, now screw you" is why. Once they got elected and

found out about the Congressional gravy train, they relized term limits were for chumps and decided to forget all about them.

[Igel]

4. Apart from the cynical reasons, there's

a simple practical one: A few states mandated them (at the state level, of course), and people didn't like them.

It takes a while to come up to speed in a legislature, to learn the ropes; to build up an awareness of what's been tried and failed, and what kinds of things *not* to do; to accrue seniority, favors, and power.

Term limits make sure every election half the legislature is coming up to speed for the first year or so, learning the ropes; nobody remembers what happened two terms ago, except some staffers and the lobbyists, who suddenly are much more influential; and nobody has seniority, so that important committee chairship that was in district 92 for decades now flops wildly about the state every term.

I liked the idea of term limits in 1994. In 1998 I hated the idea of term limits

What happened? My state enacted term limits. A good idea in a perfect world, but first we need the perfect world (and then we wouldn't need term limits, anyway).

[Cosmocat]

11. Yeah ...

I agree ... You can't keep ripping the legislature apart whole cloth ... You need that experience, and those people who have been around so long that they remember things ...

I would think that some sort of system could be implemented where each caucus could designate a percentage of their legislators who could stay on beyond a period ... Have a deal where the average senator could only serve two terms, the average house member could only serve 4 or 5 terms, then have each party be able to have 20-25% who could stay on beyond those terms ... Let each caucus figure it out after each election, who they could designate to be able to campaign to stay beyond their term limits, and if they won, fine, if not, then after that election roll it over to other people ...

[Scoody Boo]

5. It depends...

If Diebold is for term limits, we'll have term limits. :)

[kentuck]

6. Same reason they don't talk about "red alerts" or "yellow alerts"...

They are no more politically useful.

[LostInAnomie]

7. I remember when my congressman first ran...

... he was for term limits. Hostettler promised that he would only serve two terms because he only wanted to get elected to help the Repukes fulfill their contract with America. Six terms later when asked about his promise to only serve two terms he said that if the voters wanted him out they would vote him out.

Imagine that, another Repuke liar.

[derby378]

8. Because a lot of Democrats don't want term limits, either

Maybe for the President, sure - do we really want to risk a third term for Nero? But for our Congressmen - that's a different story.

[Doctor_J]

9. Part of the phony "Contract On America"

just like balanced budgets and "Congress living by the same rules as the people they represent". Strange, but my employers don't give me millions of dollars per week to campaign to keep my job.

[Tesha]

10. "Term limits" were just another cynical tool to eject Democrats from power

"Term limits" were just another cynical tool to eject Democrats
from power. The sheep were easily sold the idea and did their part,
helping the Republicans take the House in 1994 and many state
houses over the decades.

Now, of course, having served their purpose (electing Republican
majorities), term limits are passe.

The Democrats were almost criminally stupid on this issue
and allowed themselves to be played like violins. (I know:
"What's new?")

Tesha

[sendero]

12. It was my understanding ..

.. that many believed, in national office, they would not pass constitutional muster.

Beleive me, the problem in Washington is not just Republicans. It is entrenched legislators who have managed to turn their incumbency into guaranteed re-election, and just how do they do that? Corruption, comprising both the legal and illegal variety.

The founding fathers were brilliant in many ways, but they never envisioned this problem or perhaps they would have written some safeguards in. Career legislators are a bad idea IMHO, every time, we have built a system that was ripe to be taken over by corporate interests and now everyone is so damned surprised that it has.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. Term limits have an undesirable side effect in Oregon, where they are in

force.

One-third of the legislature is new each session. Not only do they not understand procedures but they keep trying to reinvent the wheel with their legislative proposals. Long-time legislators develop expertise in certain issues, and when they leave, there's often no one else who understands the issued as well as they do. Furthermore, some of them are really beneficial to their constituents and to the state, but they're forced out of office.

Term limits are a lazy person's substitute for voting.

If a legislator is doing a good job, s/he should stay in office.

If s/he isn't, then s/he should be voted out.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

14. I've always felt term limits were a bad idea.

I would imagine that, with the GOP firmly ensconsed in power, most of them are not willing to "give it up" although I know that a few of the 1994 GOP Freshman who agreed to term limits DID step down as promised. Personally, I think that term limits are a BAD idea and that people should be able to keep electing the same person over and over again as many times as they like until they decide to elect somebody else. I even believe that the term limitations on the Presidency are a bad idea as well. Being able to be elected to multiple terms may even allow voters to hold Presidents MORE accountable as witnessed by our experience with Bush. Although Bush won re-election in a "squeaker" (NOT a "mandate"), not having to seek re-election again seems to have "freed" Bush to ignore poor approval ratings (i.e. the "will of the people"), the consequences of all of the potentially damaging news stories that our "liberal media" squelched prior to the 2004 elections (and would've probably cost him the election), and basically to pursue whatever kind of agenda HE (and his financial backers) want to without worrying about alienating anybody. Presidents wouldn't HAVE to run for more than one or two terms if they didn't want to (and Bush couldn't win in another election the way things are going NOW IMHO) but frankly, I always felt that such limitations are fundamentally undemocratic and I don't believe that it was our framer's intentions to limit our choices as such.