Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Congressional Term Limits: Good or Bad?

I am a little conflicted on this issue. While I like the idea of term limits to keep the career politicians at bay, they do serve a purpose. Part of me feels that we need limits so that the old time idiots of both parties have to move on and let someone else represent the constituency.
But on the other hand, I also feel that if they were forced to move on they would be more willing to make risky votes because they won't have to answer to or depend on constituency for support. If they know they are going down they will be more willing to make radical moves.

So, are you for or against term limits? If you are against them, how do we hold bad long term politicians responsible for their negligent behavior?


Asked by Anonymous at 5:39 PM on Feb. 12, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

This question is closed.
Answers (12)
  • I am also for term limits. I kind of think that if we stop paying them so much, and stop the full lifetime pension and benefits, we might be able to weed out the ones who are in it for the $$ and get the ones who truly want to serve the people. See, THAT is the problem, they forget that they are serving the people, and they start thinking that they are way more important than any of us regular people back home.

    Answer by 29again at 6:11 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • If they have term limits they will just take bigger hand outs in a shorter amount of time. Term limits don't solve corruption. Term limits don't hold anyone accountable for their actions. Only the voters can hold hold politicians accountable, but sadly very few Americans vote.

    Answer by ecodani at 6:20 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • I agree with 29again.

    Answer by TBandNCmommy at 6:21 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • Term Limits, not only for corruption of being a career politician. But also they tend to lose touch with their constitutients and speak based on what they THINK their people want...should be someone OF the people, not OF Washington


    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 6:22 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • I think that if a big portion of people are unhappy with them they should be out. There is so much corruption I feel that there needs to be a panel of people that have the power to fire and hire these people like a real boss could. These congressmen and women need to feel like they could lose their job if they aren't doing it what their employers (US the people) want.


    Answer by SylviaNCali at 7:01 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • panel of people that have the power to fire and hire these people
    We do! They are called the constituents.

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 8:39 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • Opps, I hit enter too early. I like the idea of term limits. I agree that after they have been around for too many years, they lose sight of the reall issues, and just become part of the machine.

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 8:40 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • oops, not opps, lol

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 8:41 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • We need term limits, but we need finance reform more. It doesn't matter how many terms they get if they are free to be bought off by special interests.

    I'd love to see a truly radical change to that - every candidate gets one ad, produced with funds from a mutual pool. The ad is identical for every candidate and they fill in the blank with their position on each issue, but their own headshot in the corner and their name across the top. They get one campaign poster - same thing. They are each given the same number of commercial slots on tv and radio, and the same number of posters to hand out. Period, that's it. Aside from that they can do rallies and debates. If there's no leverage from the special interests, there is no favor to be repaid later. Accomplish that, and then limit everyone to 2 terms across the board.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 8:47 PM on Feb. 12, 2010

  • Totally agree Notpanicking....

    Right now the lobbyists actually have more say in what goes on than the constituency as a whole does...because they've put so much money in the pockets of the politicians. The politicians owe them so they do what's in their best interests rather than the interest of the country as a whole.

    Answer by meriana at 4:19 AM on Feb. 13, 2010