You offer speculation as proof and statistics when the truth different. Why would anyone want to support carrier politicians that have made up this political elite ruling class. Once they are in, they become part of the donation generating scheme and are much more likely to be re-elected thus creating the system we see.
You offer speculation as proof and statistics when the truth different.
The truth isn't different. California has had term limits on its legislature for almost 30 years. How's that going?
Show me a state with term limits that has better politicians than a similar state that doesn't have term limits. Good luck.
Once they are in, they become part of the donation generating scheme and are much more likely to be re-elected thus creating the system we see.
Term limits make that aspect worse, too. When politicians only have 4 years they have to figure out what they're going to do after they can't be in office any more. That usually means they need to land some "consulting" gig with a think tank or 501(c)(3) run by one of their donors. They have to earn their retirement job. As a bonus you have a lame duck in office every other term. They don't give a fuck because they don't have to answer to anybody.
We already have a system to get rid of politicians. Term limits is just a communist trick to make it illegal for people to vote for the candidate of their choice.
That is exactly what happened in Michigan when it voted in term limits to the State government. Somebody gets elected. They spend the next 4 years running for reelection. Once reelected they spend the next four years sucking up to the special interests for their gig after they are term limited. And their last two months before being term limited they spend passing all kinds of ridiculous bills because they won't be there to answer for them.
The term limits were voted in because the citizens thought it would make the politicians less beholden to the special interests. The reality is it has made them more beholden. Both sides of the aisle in Michigan now realize that term limits were a really bad idea.
There is a good list of states that have term limits. California is a bad example because of how locked in the population votes plus there is a revolving gubernatorial system of four families.
On a federal level, limits would have a better chance of evening the playing field due to the mix of red states and blue. There would be more accountability due to targets on people’s backs.
Our current federal no term limits is already driving the country into communism. I’d say that having no term limits is a communist trick. The name recognition of current incumbents is a real thing with studies done showing the effects on ease of reelection, plus once in they are pushed by the party leaders to keep fund raising going and so long as they can perform they stay in.
The only solution that we have right now is term limits. You can vote for who you want, but they’ll have a limit on them just like with the presidency.
The name recognition of current incumbents is a real thing with studies done showing the effects on ease of reelection
That's how it should be. If people recognize a name and still want to elect them, that's all the better than gambling on a name they haven't heard before. What you want to do is outlaw people from voting for who they want to vote for because you don't like who they vote for. There's no way to frame that as anything but communist.
(post is archived)