4 ms·

Term limits. Or vote them out next time. Part of the reason the Constitution writers made 2 and 6 year terms, to try to force the House to be responsive to publ

Term limits. Or vote them out next time. Part of the reason the Constitution writers made 2 and 6 year terms, to try to force the House to be responsive to public opinion and the Senate resistant to GIGO cycling of proposed bills. Of course that's all moot with the current 'ideology above sanity', but that's the game today. Term limits.

enraged_camel 7y ago
Term limits is one of those ideas that sound good, but is actually bad. Think about it: why would you want to have lawmakers automatically removed from office after they have gained significant experience in writing and lobbying for legislation and serving in various committees? Terminating someone when they are at the height of their productivity doesn't make any sense, either for business or for government. Furthermore, the only thing term limits would do is further encourage the "revolving doors" pattern. Every politician would optimize their legislative careers for their post-term private sector gigs, rather than try their hardest to continue doing a good job so as to get re-elected.
- pathseeker 7y ago
  >why would you want to have lawmakers automatically removed from office after they have gained significant experience in writing and lobbying for legislation and serving in various committees? Because passed laws should be about the will of the people. Not how deep the tentacles of a particular politician go. The only reason it takes so long for politicians to climb those ranks and gain power is due to the long line of lifers in front of them. 8 years is more than enough for Presidents to significantly impact the country. There is no reason a senator or a representative needs more than that. >Every politician would optimize their legislative careers for their post-term private sector gigs They do this already. The lack of term limits just allows them to continue amassing power and favors to make it more lucrative. >rather than try their hardest to continue doing a good job so as to get re-elected. You fundamentally misunderstand what the point of a member of congress. They aren't supposed to be professional politicians. They are supposed to be normal people from each state doing their duty representing that state. It's why congress isn't a full-time position.
- notatoad 7y ago
  Representatives don't write legislation, that's what their staff is for, and experience is a valuable assent in a staffer. The longer a poltician's term lasts, the more they trend towards being the governments representative to the people instead of the people's representative in government.
- zentiggr 7y ago
  > Terminating someone when they are at the height of their productivity Unfortunately for that rosy abstract view, 'gained significant experience' usually means 'entrenched in the party leadership and completely sold to special interests'. When votes wield less influence over a legislator than those who have bought them, they need to go and make room for someone less likely to get bought. Let the people make examples of the most heavily bought, and there's a snowball's chance we could get back to having representatives again, instead of corporate interest peddlers. And shorter terms, with less chance to get entrenched in influence peddling, makes that revolving door less enticing for all sides.

enraged_camel 7y ago

Term limits is one of those ideas that sound good, but is actually bad. Think about it: why would you want to have lawmakers automatically removed from office after they have gained significant experience in writing and lobbying for legislation and serving in various committees? Terminating someone when they are at the height of their productivity doesn't make any sense, either for business or for government. Furthermore, the only thing term limits would do is further encourage the "revolving doors" pattern. Every politician would optimize their legislative careers for their post-term private sector gigs, rather than try their hardest to continue doing a good job so as to get re-elected.

pathseeker 7y ago
>why would you want to have lawmakers automatically removed from office after they have gained significant experience in writing and lobbying for legislation and serving in various committees? Because passed laws should be about the will of the people. Not how deep the tentacles of a particular politician go. The only reason it takes so long for politicians to climb those ranks and gain power is due to the long line of lifers in front of them. 8 years is more than enough for Presidents to significantly impact the country. There is no reason a senator or a representative needs more than that. >Every politician would optimize their legislative careers for their post-term private sector gigs They do this already. The lack of term limits just allows them to continue amassing power and favors to make it more lucrative. >rather than try their hardest to continue doing a good job so as to get re-elected. You fundamentally misunderstand what the point of a member of congress. They aren't supposed to be professional politicians. They are supposed to be normal people from each state doing their duty representing that state. It's why congress isn't a full-time position.
notatoad 7y ago
Representatives don't write legislation, that's what their staff is for, and experience is a valuable assent in a staffer. The longer a poltician's term lasts, the more they trend towards being the governments representative to the people instead of the people's representative in government.
zentiggr 7y ago
> Terminating someone when they are at the height of their productivity Unfortunately for that rosy abstract view, 'gained significant experience' usually means 'entrenched in the party leadership and completely sold to special interests'. When votes wield less influence over a legislator than those who have bought them, they need to go and make room for someone less likely to get bought. Let the people make examples of the most heavily bought, and there's a snowball's chance we could get back to having representatives again, instead of corporate interest peddlers. And shorter terms, with less chance to get entrenched in influence peddling, makes that revolving door less enticing for all sides.