905
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
905 points (98.8% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2327 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Can you imagine how many problems simple term limits would fix?
Term limits empower lobbyists and career staffers and encourage legislators to give less of a shit about their constituents. I know "career politician" is often considered a dirty word, but having competent, knowledgeable elected officials is a good thing.
They are already openly corrupt. Term limits would result in younger candidates in touch with this century. Lobbyists would also have to bribe new people. It might also break up the ridiculous 100% party voting.
Not to mention help with our Supreme Court problems. Randomly giving appointments that last decades to whoever is president in at the time is insane.
I really don't think we have that many competent elected officials anyway.
Yes, eliminating gerrymandering and citizens united would be more effective, but I wouldn't kick term limits out of bed.
We have term limits in Florida. They have done nothing to solve any problems, and arguably have made the quality of our officials worse, while giving much more power to lobbyists.
None of that has happened in the states that have term limits. If you think Republicans, no matter how long they have been in office, are going to start putting anyone other than Federalist Society drones on the courts, I'm not sure I can have a good faith argument with you.
Term limits are as likely as ranked-choice voting, which would also solve a lot of problems but won't be passed in a significant way in my lifetime
They actually just passed ranked choice voting in my city.
It does seem crazy to have a system where 49% of people preferred the other guy, but he lost so those people now get zero representation.
Yes cuz that's worked so well in places that already have them...
No they'd hand pick them, run them on utter lies that they can't be challenged, then throw them out when the public wises up. You seriously underestimate how far the power dynamic can swing.
On the other hand, the current system of "representatives spend one full year campaigning and one full year fundraising for their party, so any legislation they sponsor in their two-year term is already written by lobbyists" isn't working out so hot either.
Throw in a law restricting campaigning more than three months before an election and a law limiting campaigns to only spending equally-dispersed public funds, and you might start to see some improvement. Oh, and reverse Citizen's United and ban Super PACs while you're at it. And can we all get a free unicorn too?
yeah, because the current batch of politicians are sooooo concerned with their constituents.
On the other hand, lets ignore the fact that the vast majority of senators (and the president, and most presidential canidates,) are so "experienced" that the majority of their experience predates... the internet. Never mind social media or anything resembling the modern world we find our selves in.
A mandatory retirement age is a different suggestion than term limits.
Yep. Why is 65 not a forced retirement for politicians, when it is used in many less important industries?
How so?
We have about 25 years worth of experiments with it in various states, so it's been well studied. Legislating is a skill that needs to be developed, just like anything else, and a bunch of term-limited newbies have no incentive to do anything except get ready for the next thing, which only enhances the possiblity of corruption.
There is definitely reasonable legislation that can have the best of both worlds here. That's a poor argument against them
I don't think term limits will solve anything near what people pitching term limits as a panacea think they will solve.
People that pitch that as a catch-all solution have no idea how democracy works, they're just understandably angry at the old white men who have ruined all our lives.
All term limits would do is make it middle aged white men ruining our lives.
Like, these people don't seem to understand where politicians come from or how they get to be where they are.
Mitch McConnell is the Senator from Kentucky. Trump won that state both years by 60%. It hasn't elected a Democratic Senator since 1992. In fact, that Democratic Senator retired, ya know, as old men should. Then a Republican took that seat.
So who do you think takes Mitch McConnell's seat if we boot him out for old age? Does it matter who? We know what letter will be next to their name.
It's the people. The problem is the people. And the structure of the Senate that gives them disproportionate power.
Also, look at the young Republicans like Madison Cawthorn and tell me they're any better than their seniors.
really, a lot of our problems boil down to "humans are just generally pretty shit"
A better example is Joe Manchin. The thought of primarying him is laughable. Just hand the Republicans a full Seat in the senate why don't you.
It will definitely solve some problems while causing arguably no new ones, I think that’s enough to push for something to happen.
the tribe wont allow this
Do you think Trump could have beaten Obama in 2016?
Yes. In fact, I believe Hillary would have beaten him without that idiotic final weekend FBI announcement.