Term limits

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Salty, Mar 13, 2008.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    216
  2. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nothing like posting something that is over 10 years old, as "current events", even in the "politics" section! (Yes, this info is from the year 1996!) :laugh:

    Can any others here, in addition to "Yours truly" spell "A-G-E-N-D-A"?

    Once again, we have "term limits", both by definition and practice, in some instances, as well. About 15 states already have term limits for legislators. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see.

    Speaking of "term limits": -

    As a matter of fact, it seems to me that your current Governor (at least through Monday), has just seen a self-imposed 14 mo. term limit, for him, in that office, imposed on and for himself, unless I have completely misunderstood the news over the last three days. :rolleyes:

    There are states that have enacted term limits for legislators; more than half sdo have term limits for Governors; cities with term limits, etc., all done at the will of the people, in accordance with the varied constitutions.

    For example, in accordance with the Constitution of the Commonwealth of VA, the Governor cannot succeed him or her self in office. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see.

    According to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of KY, the Governor can serve two terms and not run for a third term, at that time. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see.

    According to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of MA, the governor can be elected any number of times. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see.

    And according to the Constitution of the State of OH, no one can serve more than two 4 yr. terms in a lifetime. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see.

    Different things for different states. It's called "Federalism".

    There are no term limits on US Senators and Representatives. Nothing wrong with that, that I can see. It's called "The Constitution".

    What I do not agree with is the attempt to do this "from without", often including the attempt to legislate this, to do an "end run" around the Constitution! There is not one thing that prohibits someone for running for office under any platform of self-imposed guidelines, be it on this, or any other issue. Some have, were elected, and did exactly that. Former US House Republican "Caucus Chair", J. C. Watts; two Senators from TN including Fred Thompson, and Bill Frist; Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND); and Sen. John Thune (R-SD) are among those that have done exactly this.

    [BTW, Sen. Thune was previously a Representative, and served under a self-imposed three term limit, promising (and keeping that promise) to not run for a fourth term as a Congressman. Consdidered a shoo-in for a fourth term, he nonetheless, did not run for re-election to that office, and actually was defeated for in a race for Senator, before winning a Senate seat, in the next election.]

    Ed
     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,278
    Likes Received:
    778
    If we just follow the constitution and do away with much of the activity on the federal level then term limits are not necessary. Federal legislators do more than they should. it is at the state levels where all the activity should go on. And there where term limits could be very necessary. Federal legislators shouldn't have anything to do but once or twice a year.
     
  4. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Term limits are not necessary anyway, especially on the Federal level. :BangHead: :BangHead:

    That is 'following the Constitution'!

    Florida has chosen to impose 8 yr. term limits on the legislators of that state. Guess what?? That is 'following the Constitution'!

    Ed
     
  5. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    216
    In THEORY that sounds good, but in reality, it is no longer working.
     
  6. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    157
    I thank God daily for presidental term limits. :godisgood:

     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    The allusion in the link was to legislators. I have stood by the Constitutions, consistently. And suggested that if one doesn't like it, stop the belly-achin'; get yourself elected; get an amendment enacted to change the Constitution(s); instead of attempting any subtle "end-run" around it's provisions.

    And as I've said before, when We, the People, re-elect these individuals, knowing what they are, then We, the People, get exactly what we deserve!

    Ed
     
  8. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree, here.

    The REALITY is that in 2004, the Senate leader was ousted in SD by one who had previously kept his own promise no to seek re-election.

    Likewise, the REALITY is that ND elected a Senator (in a special election) who did keep his promise not to run for re-election to the seat he previously held.

    The REALITY is that in 2006, KY ousted a four term Representative, where the seat was considered so 'safe', that the 'opposition party' had decided against evne pouring any money into the campaign.

    And VA gave the boot to a Senator who was considered to be a likely candidate for President in 2008.

    And in 2007, KY ousted a sitting Governor, as well.

    That's a mere five instances of the REALITY of "term limits", the old-fashioned way - at the ballot box! FTR, only one of the five would have been under any 'term limit' constraint proposed.

    BTW, I believe, if you check, you will find that voters imposed 'term limits" on about two dozen other legislators, both Representatives and Senators in the 2006 elections.

    And I beleive voters have already currently opted for a 'term limit' of ZERO terms, for several seeking the office of President in 2008, including, but not limited to, the potential nomination of a number of current and former officials such as at least four Governors, one Mayor, five Representatives, and five Senators.

    Ed
     
  9. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    216

    The reason we re-elect these folks is because in part of the seniority system in place in Congress. Our current Congressman, Jim Walsh has announced his retirement. With 20 years in office, he has done a good job of bringing home the bacon. Next term with a Freshman, we will not do as well. Also, why do some get elected? NAME RECOGNITION!!!
    Jim Walsh was elected because his dad had been a congressman.

    This past year we elected a county executive, who happened to be a female. Currently she uses her maiden name. Why,? Because he father was also an elected official. Do I blame her, no - it did work.

    Again in theory, we have a good system, but in reality our leaders must make it work. To do that, you need to have the power.
    Actually, communism is similar. In theory, it is a good system, but for it to work, you must have leadership, but the leadership abused the power.

    Ed also said "And suggested that if one doesn't like it, stop the belly-achin'; get yourself elected
    Well, I have run for office and term limts is one of the main items on my platform.
     

Share This Page

Loading...