Will we ever see term limits on congress?

#1

93TNVol

It Wasn’t Me
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
1,365
Likes
1,448
#1
Given the difficulty of passing a constitutional amendment, will it ever happen? Do you think it's even a good idea and if so, what length of time? 8, 12, 16 years?

On the surface, term limits seem like a great way to put an end to some of the worst habits we see in Washington. I totally understand the flip side that election is a term limit in itself, but I don't buy that (imagine a little guy running against a well funded big name incumbent). I also understand that it takes time to develop the skills to be a good rep or senator. It takes time to learn how things work and how to become effective in D.C.

My fellow Vols, what are your opinions on the subject? I've given this a lot of thought and my personal feeling is that there absolutely should be term limits. Just wonder how you all feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2
#2
I used to be for term limits, but I've been convinced they are not as desirable as they seem on the surface.

Since 15 states do have term limits, we actually can know something about their effects. And the political science literature here is pretty unequivocal. Term limits are the surest way to weaken the legislative branch and empower the executive branch.

The executive already has way too much power.

Congressional term limits are a bad idea - Vox
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
I used to be for term limits, but I've been convinced they are not as desirable as they seem on the surface.



The executive already has way too much power.

Congressional term limits are a bad idea - Vox
That's where I'm at too I guess. It seems logical that we should have limits but I've read lots of arguments by poli-scientist that show why they aren't so great. (Making lobbyists more powerful for example) Would a limit like 16 years still erode the power of Congress?
 
#5
#5
3 consecutive terms for Senators (18 years); 6 or 7 for House Reps (12 - 14 years).

Should be sufficient to thwart E-power and still prevent the career politician from becoming a complete tool of DC
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9
#9
3 consecutive terms for Senators (18 years); 6 or 7 for House Reps (12 - 14 years).

Should be sufficient to thwart E-power and still prevent the career politician from becoming a complete tool of DC

This seems reasonable and might even minimize the outside influence of lobbyists.
 
#10
#10
I used to be for term limits, but I've been convinced they are not as desirable as they seem on the surface.



The executive already has way too much power.

Congressional term limits are a bad idea - Vox

Did you look at any of the studies in that Vox piece? The very first one they mention was a survey of legislators only. They are not empirically validating an increase in Exec power. Same for the other studies so far as I can tell.

I'm not attacking your argument - just the use of this Vox piece to bolster it.
 
#11
#11
3 consecutive terms for Senators (18 years); 6 or 7 for House Reps (12 - 14 years).

Should be sufficient to thwart E-power and still prevent the career politician from becoming a complete tool of DC


Pretty much where I'm at.
 
#13
#13
The Vox argument is that agencies have less oversight with term limited legislatures. I don't buy that on face value - can anyone point to Congressional stalwarts (there over 15 years) that are actively limiting the actions of agencies?

Agency oversight occurs in 3 ways so far as I can tell - Congressional (though the balance of power continually shifts), replacement of leadership with each new POTUS or POTUS term and internal IGs.

I don't see how term limits change that in any material way.
 
#15
#15
Did you look at any of the studies in that Vox piece? The very first one they mention was a survey of legislators only. They are not empirically validating an increase in Exec power. Same for the other studies so far as I can tell.

I'm not attacking your argument - just the use of this Vox piece to bolster it.

That was just a quick reference to the idea that it emboldens the executive. IDK enough about Vox to call it a good source of actual facts.
 
#16
#16
Ted Kennedy was a senator for more years than I've been alive. That just isn't right and why I say there has to be a limit. I just don't know if it can be done.

The two states I've lived in the last 20 years both have a 30+ year senator. It's ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#17
#17
That was just a quick reference to the idea that it emboldens the executive. IDK enough about Vox to call it a good source of actual facts.

I assumed the former :hi:

As for Vox - it's on my list of the worst kind of new journalism. It claims to be "data-driven" backing up it's conclusions with data but in example after example what you see is they begin with a premise then find "data" that supports it (sometimes not if you actually look at the source) and ignore data that doesn't.

It attempts to create an aura of scientific validation for opinions but in the end it's just another opinion rag. The difference with it (and other of these data-driven sources) is they dump reporting in favor of Google searching for source material.
 
#18
#18
Yes to term limits. Dubious it ever happens. Yes to keeping house members in their state or district 90% of the time and out of DC (especially with our current tech).
Yes to increasing the Congress 10 times the current number.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#19
#19
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
Given the difficulty of passing a constitutional amendment, will it ever happen? Do you think it's even a good idea and if so, what length of time? 8, 12, 16 years?

On the surface, term limits seem like a great way to put an end to some of the worst habits we see in Washington. I totally understand the flip side that election is a term limit in itself, but I don't buy that (imagine a little guy running against a well funded big name incumbent). I also understand that it takes time to develop the skills to be a good rep or senator. It takes time to learn how things work and how to become effective in D.C.

My fellow Vols, what are your opinions on the subject? I've given this a lot of thought and my personal feeling is that there absolutely should be term limits. Just wonder how you all feel.

I hope so. When Mica lost in Florida the news said "12 term" congressman..I assumed that was a mistake..but I was wrong. A transportation guy and Florida's highway systems sucks the big one..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
Yes to term limits. Dubious it ever happens. Yes to keeping house members in their state or district 90% of the time and out of DC (especially with our current tech).
Yes to increasing the Congress 10 times the current number.

More reps to minimize the effect of a corrupt few? Seems logical, but 10X is a lot!
 
#22
#22
I hope so. When Mica lost in Florida the news said "12 term" congressman..I assumed that was a mistake..but I was wrong. A transportation guy and Florida's highway systems sucks the big one..

12 term!!?? Maybe we should grind up congress people and just use them to fill in the nations potholes! They have no shame...yup I looked it up been there since 93.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#24
#24
More reps to minimize the effect of a corrupt few? Seems logical, but 10X is a lot!

Increase for adequate representation. fframers wanted 50-60k per Rep. We're at 1 Rep per 700k.

360,000,000 ÷ 50,000 = 7,200 Congressional Reps needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#25
#25
Thad Cockran...7 terms Senate, 3 terms House. Nearly 50 years in DC and Mississippi is the worst state in the US.
JesusFacepalm2.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

VN Store



Back
Top