Historical context for Tuesday's elections Topic

tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/3/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
While we're never going to be a one-term country, it seems like term limits for all elected officials would be a step in the right direction.    The POTUS is allowed two terms.   Why not apply that to Congress?    Be rid of career politicians. 
Playing devil's advocate, here's the (or one of the) downsides to term limits for Congress: using you example of Obamacare going "full on" in his second term when he no longer had to worry about re-election, what's to stop members of Congress from abandoning the promises to their electorates in their final terms, when they know they won't have to hold themselves accountable to the voters within the next two or six years?
11/3/2014 2:30 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I don't think Congress holds the same power as President.
11/3/2014 2:38 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
At worst, he could campaign as an anti-Obamacare guy and then vote "yes" on it.
11/3/2014 2:38 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Well, Congress makes the laws.
11/3/2014 3:21 PM
DougOut
Posts: 44973 (0)
Hall of Famer
128
Prospect
  Well, democrats find the "lost" votes.
11/3/2014 3:23 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 11/3/2014 3:21:00 PM (view original):
Well, Congress makes the laws.
Congress isn't one rogue senator backing out on his campaign promises.

All that aside, when "politician" is no longer a career, I think you'd find that people actually looking to serve would be more likely to run.
11/3/2014 3:58 PM
stinenavy
Posts: 4004 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 330 1
All Star
I would prefer that credible challengers primary people that have been in office for extended periods of time.


Quick example:
California's Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein have been there since 1992. Neither has been seriously challenged in a primary. I think that in the nation's most populous state you could find some credible individual to run against them.
11/3/2014 5:14 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
You can't force people to run.   Campaigns cost money and, if it's a lost cause, there's little point in doing it.    The guys that have been in 20 years probably go unchallenged because of that.
11/3/2014 5:26 PM
stinenavy
Posts: 4004 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 330 1
All Star
How do you know if it is a lost cause until you try? How much did lack of funds hurt Dave Brat and David Ige?
11/3/2014 7:18 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/3/2014 3:58:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 11/3/2014 3:21:00 PM (view original):
Well, Congress makes the laws.
Congress isn't one rogue senator backing out on his campaign promises.

All that aside, when "politician" is no longer a career, I think you'd find that people actually looking to serve would be more likely to run.
No, but if you have a hundred+ lame duck congressmen, or a couple of dozen lame duck senators, none of whom have to worry about being held accountable by the voters at the end of their current terms, all bets are off with respect to what they're going to do.

I can also envision a situation where you have special interest groups backing "hit and run" politicians to get elected on knowingly false promises, do their dirty work, and then getting the hell out.

There's something to be said for the power of accountability to the voters.  It's the devil you know as opposed to the devil you don't know.
11/4/2014 7:23 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

In your fantasy world where there are hordes of Congressmen "doing the dirty work for special interest groups" is there still a Presidential veto power?    A way for the next Congress to overturn previous laws?   Any sort of way to prevent this horde of rogue Congressmen from legalizing slavery of women aged 18-21?

11/4/2014 8:09 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
I suppose that we can just pretend that all politicians in your new magical land of term-limits will always be working 100% for the good of the people, and not for themselves or the special interest groups stuffing their pockets with money.
11/4/2014 9:47 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Never made a claim like that.   I simply insinuated that removing "politician" as a career might possible bring in people who are more apt to serve rather than cater to outside interests for re-election.

And, badluckwrg, I noticed that you didn't answer a single question. 
11/4/2014 11:23 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Yes.

Yes.  But do you want a system where laws are going in and out of the books like a yo-yo?

No.  Do you think that's likely?
11/4/2014 11:49 AM
◂ Prev 12345 Next ▸
Historical context for Tuesday's elections Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.