What I believe and Why I believe that way

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I have never understood the term limits debate. Terms limits are already contained in the constitution; they are called elections.

Exactly. If citizens are unhappy, vote out the incumbant. It's a very simple solution.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I have never understood the term limits debate. Terms limits are already contained in the constitution; they are called elections.

Do you really believe that? What percentage of incumbents would you guess win reelection?

Would you believe it averages around 94%? In some years, it is as high as 99% (2004 congressional elections are an example of a year with 99% success).

Incumbents have a built-in money machine, they have free publicity, greater name recognition, and the ability to crush opponents by promising more money to special interest groups that support the incumbent.

It isn't a fair fight. Term limits gets fresh ideas into the government, gets rid of the most entrenched members of the goverment (who tend to, over time, be the most beholden to special interest groups), and forces people to pay a bit more attention to an election.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Exactly. If citizens are unhappy, vote out the incumbant. It's a very simple solution.

A solution so simple that 99% of incumbents won in the US House in 2004, despite public opinion polls that said that a majority of Americans thought Congress was doing a bad job.

In 2006, 94% of House incumbents won.

Here is an interesting article on the topic:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pressrele...ction.11.8.asp

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

It isn't a fair fight. Term limits gets fresh ideas into the government, gets rid of the most entrenched members of the goverment (who tend to, over time, be the most beholden to special interest groups), and forces people to pay a bit more attention to an election.

I think you overrate the power of the elected official and underestimate their staff members. The most entrenched members of government are the lifetime staffers and the lobbyists who know them. If term limits were introduced, they people would be the only ones with institutional memory and their power would grow exponentially.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by YOhio

I think you overrate the power of the elected official and underestimate their staff members. The most entrenched members of government are the lifetime staffers and the lobbyists who know them. If term limits were introduced, they people would be the only ones with institutional memory and their power would grow exponentially.

It is a very difficult problem, as the unelected staffers and policy wonks in government have TOO much influence. Why, IMHO, because they are unelected, and their institutional knowledge allows them to lead elected officials around by the noses, until the official knows his way around the block.

We need new ideas, and my radical idea is for staffers to have term limits as well. Our bureaucracies should be flushed now and then.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Do you really believe that? What percentage of incumbents would you guess win reelection?

Would you believe it averages around 94%? In some years, it is as high as 99% (2004 congressional elections are an example of a year with 99% success).

Incumbents have a built-in money machine, they have free publicity, greater name recognition, and the ability to crush opponents by promising more money to special interest groups that support the incumbent.

It isn't a fair fight. Term limits gets fresh ideas into the government, gets rid of the most entrenched members of the goverment (who tend to, over time, be the most beholden to special interest groups), and forces people to pay a bit more attention to an election.

Wow...we agree on something. I'm not sure how I feel about that.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by Archaea

It is a very difficult problem, as the unelected staffers and policy wonks in government have TOO much influence. Why, IMHO, because they are unelected, and their institutional knowledge allows them to lead elected officials around by the noses, until the official knows his way around the block.

We need new ideas, and my radical idea is for staffers to have term limits as well. Our bureaucracies should be flushed now and then.

Government regulation for government regulators? Ain't gonna happen. The only way that true change can occur is a concerned and informed citizenry.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by YOhio

The only way that true change can occur is a concerned and informed citizenry.

right. This is what's got the husband all anti-democratic. He believes that if Homer Simpson can't be bothered to research the issues, then either Homer shouldn't be allowed to vote, or we shouldn't be voting at all.

[MikeWaters]

isn't listening to Rush Limbaugh the same thing as researching the issues?

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

isn't listening to Rush Limbaugh the same thing as researching the issues?

It's better than nothing.