3 ms·

The appeal is that it would make being a career politician impossible and that term-limited congress would therefore act out of interest for their constituents

The appeal is that it would make being a career politician impossible and that term-limited congress would therefore act out of interest for their constituents rather than themselves. But you're right that it would also prevent good politicians from staying. Another proposal which could have a similar effect would be to drastically increase the number of representatives so that each one represents a smaller number of people (say 50,000). Having many more reps would reduces the individual power and influence of any one rep in particular and could dissuade them from acting in their own best interest.

rsl7 10y ago
Term limits mean just as people really figure out how it works and how to get things done, they're gone.
mikestew 10y ago
The appeal is that it would make being a career politician impossible The assumption, and I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong, is that "career politician" is undesirable. How about getting rid of "career software developers"? Get rid of those entrenched JavaScript devs that are only interested in feathering their own nests. "Career doctors"? The medical profession is really just a business, and it should be treated like one. Next time you break a limb, seek out an MBA instead. Point is, the more I've been involved in politics (including running for office) the more I realize that you're not just going to march in on the first day and get stuff done. Kind of like that first day with that new codebase, eh? Now, I don't know that one out to be "Congress critter for life", but you don't just waltz in an go "my constituents want $THIS" and expect it to just happen. So a little experience might go further than electing the "outsider" who isn't "beholden to special interests".
- stevesearer 10y ago
  I agree that career politicians aren't inherently bad and was more just stating plain reasoning to the parent's question. "Career politicians" and term limits are an easy thing to point to that don't actually deal with the problem which in my mind has more to do with each individual representative carrying too much importance because there are so few of them. Also one person cannot reasonably represent the views of 1M constituents.
  - mikestew 10y ago
    In complete agreement; well stated. Since the Constitution was written, the population has increased, what, a couple of orders of magnitude? And yet the same 435 reps?
    - davvolun 10y ago
      Not technically correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives#Number_of_Representatives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_H...
- cobookman 10y ago
  Most companies avoid having the same person do the same job for a long time. Fresh blood sees things differently and might re-try something that failed in the past. Don't forget that generally speaking a congressman doesn't usually start his political career in congress.
jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
> therefore act out of interest for their constituents rather than themselves. I don't see how that follows. Wouldn't the limit encourage a congressional rep to cravenly maximize whatever personal benefits they can once they're in their final term? They don't need to fear re-election.

rsl7 10y ago

Term limits mean just as people really figure out how it works and how to get things done, they're gone.

mikestew 10y ago

The appeal is that it would make being a career politician impossible The assumption, and I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong, is that "career politician" is undesirable. How about getting rid of "career software developers"? Get rid of those entrenched JavaScript devs that are only interested in feathering their own nests. "Career doctors"? The medical profession is really just a business, and it should be treated like one. Next time you break a limb, seek out an MBA instead. Point is, the more I've been involved in politics (including running for office) the more I realize that you're not just going to march in on the first day and get stuff done. Kind of like that first day with that new codebase, eh? Now, I don't know that one out to be "Congress critter for life", but you don't just waltz in an go "my constituents want $THIS" and expect it to just happen. So a little experience might go further than electing the "outsider" who isn't "beholden to special interests".

stevesearer 10y ago
I agree that career politicians aren't inherently bad and was more just stating plain reasoning to the parent's question. "Career politicians" and term limits are an easy thing to point to that don't actually deal with the problem which in my mind has more to do with each individual representative carrying too much importance because there are so few of them. Also one person cannot reasonably represent the views of 1M constituents.
- mikestew 10y ago
  In complete agreement; well stated. Since the Constitution was written, the population has increased, what, a couple of orders of magnitude? And yet the same 435 reps?
  - davvolun 10y ago
    Not technically correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives#Number_of_Representatives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_H...
cobookman 10y ago
Most companies avoid having the same person do the same job for a long time. Fresh blood sees things differently and might re-try something that failed in the past. Don't forget that generally speaking a congressman doesn't usually start his political career in congress.

jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago

> therefore act out of interest for their constituents rather than themselves. I don't see how that follows. Wouldn't the limit encourage a congressional rep to cravenly maximize whatever personal benefits they can once they're in their final term? They don't need to fear re-election.