real term limits

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... mas-sowell

........"Those who oppose term limits express fears of having government run by amateurs, rather than by people with long experience in politics. But this country was created by people who were not career politicians, but who put aside their own private careers to serve in office during a critical time.

When President George Washington was told by one of his advisers that an action he planned to take might prevent him from being reelected, he exploded in anger, telling his adviser that he didn’t come here to get reelected.

As for the claim that there would be a loss of experience and expertise if there were no career politicians, much — if not most — of that experience and expertise is in the arts of evasion, effrontery, deceit, and chicanery. None of that serves the interest of the people."......................

I disagree. Term limits say you don't trust our voters. And I think it makes politicians less responsible to them. If Senators had one six year term, would they pursue damaging policies that only benefited their retirement funds? Care little about the people of their state?

FredHayek wrote: I disagree. Term limits say you don't trust our voters. And I think it makes politicians less responsible to them. If Senators had one six year term, would they pursue damaging policies that only benefited their retirement funds? Care little about the people of their state?

That is one way to look at it. It is working so well that I want to vomit.

I believe the point of the piece is that the scum you refer too would be less likely to ever run and we would get more citizen-legislators as God intended.

If you are right, I think they would be in a position to do less damage than the self serving scums that are currently in office.

Blazer Bob wrote:

FredHayek wrote: I disagree. Term limits say you don't trust our voters. And I think it makes politicians less responsible to them. If Senators had one six year term, would they pursue damaging policies that only benefited their retirement funds? Care little about the people of their state?

That is one way to look at it. It is working so well that I want to vomit.

I believe the point of the piece is that the scum you refer too would be less likely to ever run and we would get more citizen-legislators as God intended.

If you are right, I think they would be in a position to do less damage than the self serving scums that are currently in office.

:thumbsup:

Term limits (4 years max in a lifetime is good) and a 50% CUT in saleries, and NO retirement at all will get their attention......the legislators at all levels have fleeced the American Sheep.

deltamrey wrote: Term limits (4 years max in a lifetime is good) and a 50% CUT in saleries, and NO retirement at all will get their attention......the legislators at all levels have fleeced the American Sheep.

So if you refuse to pay them well enough to live on, who will you attract to the jobs? Wealthy do gooders who don't need the money? Opportunists who will fund themselves through kickbacks?

Your ideas sound good in principle but there are always unintended consequences.

FredHayek wrote:

deltamrey wrote: Term limits (4 years max in a lifetime is good) and a 50% CUT in saleries, and NO retirement at all will get their attention......the legislators at all levels have fleeced the American Sheep.

So if you refuse to pay them well enough to live on, who will you attract to the jobs? Wealthy do gooders who don't need the money? Opportunists who will fund themselves through kickbacks?

Your ideas sound good in principle but there are always unintended consequences.

What is wrong with do gooders who love their country and want to give something back?

People like Jared Polis?

I know there are real problems with the current system but I don't think forcing out the good just because they have been there too long is a good thing.

FredHayek wrote:

deltamrey wrote: Term limits (4 years max in a lifetime is good) and a 50% CUT in saleries, and NO retirement at all will get their attention......the legislators at all levels have fleeced the American Sheep.

So if you refuse to pay them well enough to live on, who will you attract to the jobs? Wealthy do gooders who don't need the money? Opportunists who will fund themselves through kickbacks?

Your ideas sound good in principle but there are always unintended consequences.

I disagree. The average salary for members of House and Senate is $174k a year. Half of that would be 87k a year. There's plenty of smart qualified Americans who would find a way to survive on that salary. These people work for us yet have given themselves raises year after year. The average Federal salary is 83k for people who probably work just as hard as these dopes in congress.

And then there's the fact that so many in congress leave office as millionaires.... that's sick.

Look at the quality we have now........bloated saleries, perks, retirements, medical.......we can easily do better.