Wouldn't it be nice if we had term limits for all of our representatives

[phylny]

and a dollar limit on the amount of contributions corporations are permitted to give candidates? Imagine if our representatives represented OUR interests, without pressure from corporate interest groups.

The more I hear, the more I read, the more I see, the more I know, the more I'm disgusted, frightened, and disillusioned. I cannot believe what I've witnessed in my lifetime in this country.

[kevinmc]

1. I voted for term limits.......

here in California for the State Rep's, worse thing we did was pass that law. Now you get people who just get in office to get what they can for their friends and partners. They don't have too answer to anyone.

I would rather they make it so their raises are voted on by the people they represent, and they get a Lie Detector Test Quarterly broadcast live on local news.

[phylny]

5. That's great insight. Thanks n/t

[mcscajun]

2. We have term limits: They're called elections.

But I'll back the limits on Corporate contributions, and I'm personally against Corporate PACs.

[Toucano]

4. Right on!

Term limits are totally undemocratic.

[THUNDER HANDS]

9. i totally disagree

Term limits are the only solution to a House turnover ratio less than the old Soviet Union under the height of communism.

This country has NEVER had a high turnover ratio on congress despite elections every other year.

[Dr.Phool]

12. We have term limits in Florida

And they are a farce. Last year, not one incumbent up for election lost. And this with probably the second (behind Texas) most corrupt statehouse in the country.

With term limits, you lose a lot of good experienced legislators, and you get rookies who don't know what they're doing, and the lobbyists write the legislation and pay for the campaigns.

[THUNDER HANDS]

16. you lose some good ones, you lose some bad ones

its a trade-off I'm willing to make.

I'll trade a Barney Frank for a Tom Delay any day of the week.

[arcos]

13. that's because representatives choose their constituents by gerrymandering

nt

[Toucano]

20. Who cares?

That's meaningless. House "turnover" is not a goal I share with you, evidently.

My goal is getting bad legislators out and keeping good legislators in.
Term limits work against that goal by constantly creating lame ducks who don't have to answer to the electorate.

You don't have any right to tell me who I can and can't vote for. If the electorate chooses to keep someone like Tom DeLay, that's their right.

[Eloriel]

19. Thank you. Me too.

I get pretty upset whenever I hear people posting HERE using GOP talking points or agenda. Term limits was a scheme they dreamed up when the Democrats held power in Congress for so many years (40, wasn't it?). They couldn't beat them electorally, so they decided to try to limit their ability to stay in office otherwise.

[phylny]

21. GOP talking points?

Well, I guess I had no idea. SORRY.

[me b zola]

3. I am all for limiting corporate influence in politics/elections

I believe, though, that we have term limits, they are called elections. The bad guys would just keep plugging corporate whores into the elections, while we would lose wonderful Congressmen/women of integrity who fight for our rights. It is far easier to find whores to run than it is to find people of integrity.

Far better for us to throw out our Dino Senators & representatives & set the bar higher for people who want to call themselves Democrats.

[adwon]

6. Term limits are fool's gold

Mexico has very stringent term limits: one term for a congressional seat. So what do people do? Run from another district.

[seventythree]

7. good thinking by everyone

[catmandu57]

8. What we really need to do is get these damn corporations out

of government. Their money has silenced the voice of the people, "our" representitives aren't ours, they don't look after our interest any longer.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. Corporations are forbidden by law to donate money to federal candidates

[Dr.Phool]

17. You ever hear of a PAC?

Loophole in corporate donations.

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. Corporations can't give any money to PAC's that donate for fed. candidates

[shance]

11. You bet. There should be term limits just like the President has.

Elections can be bought and sold, now more than ever, and term limits allows for different people to hold office instead of some hog incumbent staying in until the end of time.

We do have some exceptions, Robert Byrd and Kennedy. However look at the others like Biden and Lieberman not to mention the other Republicans who are using our government as their money machine.

I believe we definitely need term limits.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. Term limits was #10 on Newt Gingrich's Contract with America

http://www.house.gov/house/Contract/CONTRACT.html

[bobthedrummer]

14. Instead we have American political dynasties and families that are in

the power elite, like the Bush family evil empire/BFEE.

The founding fathers wanted term limits too.

[JHB]

15. No, it would be a hack & flack's dream

The downside of term limits is that it would ensure that elected officials would always be the neophytes learning the ropes, while strengthening the hand of "permanent Washington", the lobbyists and professional staffers, making them the only people with in-depth experience and who know all the tricks of the trade. They'd become even more valuable to politicians in order to provide an image of success and getting things done, so the worst, most ruthless of them would always find someone to hire them.

What we'd wind up with would be corporations and the rich & powerful getting their way by patronizing the background people, while the people who have to answer to the public would come and go in an endless parade of newbies.

The net effect would be to further remove real accountability from the people, not enhance it.

[KansDem]

18. Term limits would keep many people from running for office...

The only people who could run for office would be those candidates from "slip out and in" occupations. For example, a lawyer could take off for 2, 4, or 6 years to serve in the US Congress, then when the term is completed, go back to his old law firm, or any law firm. Same with the affluent, such as executives.

But the "Average Joe" couldn't go to his boss and say, "I'm thinking about running for Congress. Could I have a 2, 4, or 6 year leave of absence?" Do you think someone who works in a factory or warehouse, or drives a truck or works retail, will be able to do this? Do you think his boss is going along with that request? I wonder why the GOP, so hellbent on "term limits," hasn't proposed legislation that would make it a requirement for an employer to offer the same position to an employee who comes back to work after service in Congress, sort of like what is done with military reservists. But as it is, you're asking someone to leave the workforce for a few years with a loss of job security and benefits, such as retirement.

But the GOP doesn't really care about "term limits." Repubs just used it to gain control of Congress (I think "term limits" was in the 1994 "Contract on America"). Repubs don't really want to have limits on other Repubs: too much reliance on Diebold to constantly replace Repubs with Repubs might likely expose the whole election fraud debacle (moreso then it has now).

___
edited for clarification