Skip to main content

Today's Poll: Should there be congressional term limits?

By Howard B. Owens
bud prevost

And we should limit the president to one 6 year term. That way, the person in office doesn't feel compelled to constantly campaign for reelection, and won't fear making decisions that prove unpopular. The government needs to get back to working for the people, not for the wealthy CEO's and bankers.

Oct 23, 2014, 9:24am Permalink
Scott Ogle

We already have term limits; each member of Congress must stand every two years, every Senator each six years. Institutional memory matters. It's another reason why everyone should vote.

How many watched the four debate for governor last night?

Oct 23, 2014, 10:14am Permalink
Tim Miller

If there are limits, they should be in effect for all states, not imposed within a state by that state.

The harm term limits try to alleviate is caused by entrenched long-timers with disproportionate power due to seniority. We've seen that when some states have term limits, those without have representatives who have an easier time climbing the seniority ladder.

Oct 23, 2014, 10:28am Permalink
John Roach

People want term limits, but most don't even bother to vote. There are at least 4 candidates of governor this year. Just get off your rear and vote for one of them.

Oct 23, 2014, 10:29am Permalink
Jason Crater

Scott - I think the poll is referring to the number of terms an elected official can serve.

Tim - I disagree. Let the states decide. Federal government is too big already.

Oct 23, 2014, 11:11am Permalink
Kyle Slocum

Here are two thoughts about term limits:

A constant turnover of legislators will empower the the unaccountable staffs and bureaucrats even more.

That same constant flow of new faces may be more willing to cut down the old hands and bureaucrats down to size.

I conclude that if term limits do ever get passed, they will not solve all the problems that we would like them to, but they will definitely change the game.

Oct 23, 2014, 7:47pm Permalink
Tim Miller

Jason - you make a good point about it being a state-level decision. My comment was more of a practical matter. As beneficial as term limits might be, there's no way in hades I'd choose it for my state if the next state over was not choosing it. Do YOU want a Rep with 2 years seniority, knowing seniority determines relative strength, going up against a Rostenkowski, or a Boehner?

Oct 23, 2014, 7:49pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

My argument against term limits is and has been California. More than two decades of term limits and Sacramento still competes with Albany for the most dysfunctional state capitol in the union.

That's because the individual politicians don't run things. The political parties run the show.

Until you break the power of the parties, nothing will ever change.

Oct 24, 2014, 9:29am Permalink

Authentically Local