Presidential Term Limits???

[Ted S.]

Amazing that everyone disagees with me on this, yet, term limits still exist. Conspiracy!!!  :tinfoil:

 

Sent from somewhere in the cosmos using magic...and bacon.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Ted S.

[Mike.357]

I did not even read responses.

 

"One and done" is the motto our country should follow. 

 

If elected for any office you will serve one term and never be eligiible to serve another term of any elected office.  how is that?

[Guest PapaB]

I did not even read responses.

 

"One and done" is the motto our country should follow. 

 

If elected for any office you will serve one term and never be eligiible to serve another term of any elected office.  how is that?

 

That would mean all future potus's would have even less experience than the current one. I can't imagine that would end well. In addition, at any given time there are millions of people serving in elected offices, from dog catcher on up. We'd run out of candidates in just a few years and who would run for certain jobs knowing they couldn't do better. VP would have to be appointed.

[npgunner]

[quote name="MacGyver" post="1071737" timestamp="1385915900"]I think we ought to quit withholding payroll taxes. Make everyone write one check on April 15th and then immediately follow it with Election Day on April 16. Term limits would be a self-correcting problem.[/quote] This! ... elections don't necessarily have to be next day in my book. But Americans would care way more of they actually felt the impact of their taxes. Not noticing several thousand dollars slip away a little bit at a time over the year is way different than one big tax bill every April. Someone once told me that % tax that sparked the Revolutionary War was significantly less than what the average American is taxed now. Of course, getting rid of the income tax would never make it through Congress no matter how "conservative" the Congress was.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Some say max 2 terms in senate, 6 in house. Maybe thats OK but I'm thinkin 1 and 3 might be better. They need at least enough time in capitol city to learn how to find the restroom and cafeteria, and to steal enough money to make it worth running at all.

So a fella who runs 6 years in house, might also have a chance to run 6 years in senate, then 4 years as a governor, 4 years as a president, whatever, before he either has to get a real job, or run for comptroller or dogcatcher or whatever.

But a 1 term prez limit would be best, merely because there are hardly any second terms in modern times that were "remarkably good". Maybe in theory 2 terms is better, but in practice, look at the "second terms" of johnson, nixon, clinton, bush jr, obama. I personally wouldn't give reagan's second time at bat all that big a score. Truman was purt good but was wearing kinda thin the last years. Eisenhower, maybe he had two good times at bat, would need to go back and study up on it. Edited December 23, 2013 by Lester Weevils

[tnguy]

That would mean all future potus's would have even less experience than the current one. I can't imagine that would end well. In addition, at any given time there are millions of people serving in elected offices, from dog catcher on up. We'd run out of candidates in just a few years and who would run for certain jobs knowing they couldn't do better. VP would have to be appointed.

 

They should go back to the original system where the VP is the runner-up from the presidential election. I think it actually makes a lot of sense if you forget the menatility of "my team won" for a second and think of it in terms of having a country to run.

[gun sane]

They had to beg Washington to take a second term.  After being a general and president, he felt it prudent to go back to Mt. Vernon and watch his crops grow.  He was not a politician, but a remarkable pragmatist who saw the country's greatest need and unselfishly acted to fill it.  Today's self-centered opportunists ignore the need and grab what's best for them.

[Guest TresOsos]

I think we could correct the problem also if we went back to the way the FF's set it up originally.

Repeal the 17th Amendment and make Senator appointed by the State Legislators again and thus beholding to the states

and keeping the States best interest at heart again. The FF's did what they did for a reason and the 17th A screwed it up.

 

I don't agree with they are there and get re-elected because people want them there. I think once you get an incumbent

it is extremely hard to beat them. The acquire a lot of wealth and out of state money to run for re-election.

That would be another law, they can only raise money for there election-re-election from within the state and only

from citizens of the state, not outside money or PAC money.

[gun sane]

And speaking of term limits, how about limiting the tenure of congressional leadership?  What if the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority/Minority leaders could only serve one term?  A lot of the crap in Congress is because of their own rules not cited in the Constitution.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Congressional leadership is probably something the people couldn't fix, except with everything else, their vote. I don't know the history

of that, but I would assume it has always been up to the bodies, themselves. As it stands, the House Speaker doesn't have to be a

member of Congress. There is no party requirement that controls it, and it is probably similar in the Senate. These things are, otherwise,

organizational within the majority party itself. Common sense should mandate that the Speaker be of strong character and be elected

to guide the majority's agenda, and not reach across the aisle. Just about any multi-party system is adversarial. The Republicans just

have a week Speaker, and it appears to be based on seniority and patronage.

[bersaguy]

And speaking of term limits, how about limiting the tenure of congressional leadership?  What if the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority/Minority leaders could only serve one term?  A lot of the crap in Congress is because of their own rules not cited in the Constitution.

 

And speaking of term limits, how about limiting the tenure of congressional leadership?  What if the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority/Minority leaders could only serve one term?  A lot of the crap in Congress is because of their own rules not cited in the Constitution.

I really do agree with yo on this issue for sure. Just look at Bohner and Reid. The House sends bill after bill to the Senate for a vote and they just lay on Reid's desk in the ignore folder box because he is the one that decides on which bills are voted on and which ones are not. I don't think he or any other Senate leader should have that kind of power. I think if a bill is sent from the House to the Senate the Senate should hear the bill and vote on it in 7 days or it automatically passes. That would prevent all this BS about the crap that the House has not sent a budget or the House has not presented a health plan. This House has sent several hundred bills to the Senate on these issues and Reid trashes them in file 13 and never brings them to the floor for a vote. To me Reid needs to be put in file 13 along with all the bills..........jmho

[Guest 6.8 AR]

How about forgetting term limits on anything, taking away all the perks of office, like pension, exemptions from legislation, insider trading,

making them accountable again? They wrote themselves several laws that allow them to get away with everything except murder, and

they keep pushing the limits further each day. This term limit talk that keeps coming up will do nothing, except make you think you did

something and say "well, we tried. Just no way to keep them honest", and continue the debate somewhere else.

 

And how about rolling back their salaries until they produce a sustainable budget?

[Randall53]

How about no term limits for anyone, but each term is for two years only. No lifetime terms for anybody. any and all raises, perks or benefits be voted on at time of elections only by We The People? Edited December 24, 2013 by Randall53

[gun sane]

They wrote themselves several laws that allow them to get away with everything except murder, and they keep pushing the limits further each day.

 

I think they're working to excuse murder, too.  Remember Benghazi and Fast & Furious?

Edited December 24, 2013 by gun sane