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

(minimum 6 characters)

2 Bumps

Term Limits?

What, if any, term limits do you think should be set for our representatives? Should we set lifetime limits on serving in government?

What do you think about scaling them back to part-time so they have time to actually live in the area they represent?

Answer Question

Asked by LeanneC at 11:48 AM on Oct. 29, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 18 (6,435 Credits)
Answers (10)
  • There should be term limits! One or two terms max! If it doesn't become a law I think we voters should enforce it anyway by voting the fat cats out of office! They get too complacent and think (most correctly) that they have a lifetime job and then don't give a rat's fanny about helping the constituents.

    Answer by duckigrrl at 11:51 AM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I think there should be term limits and I don't think they should have benefits for life after serving their terms.

    Answer by tabekat at 11:55 AM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • Thomas Jefferson never intended for anyone to make a career out of holding an office. He felt that it would be more like community service. I think one term is enough, with maybe another term after several elections, just not back to back. Politicans use their offices for obtaining power not for governing this country. How many of them have actually voted as their constituency wanted? No, they even trade votes among themselves. I intend to vote for all new faces.

    Answer by depressedmom65 at 11:59 AM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • And I also think there should be no retirement fund for elected officals. They get 90% of what they earned back in retirement checks.

    Answer by depressedmom65 at 12:01 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I think 2-3 terms would be the best. I think the first term could be a learning process and their best work isn't seen until the second term anyway. Definately no lifetime jobs - it should be a short-term community service. I think the pay should be ALOT lower, too, to reflect the idea of community service and not a 'hot job'.

    Answer by at 12:43 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I think two terms as a representative (not back to back because we don't want them campaigning while they should be doing their job) and one term as senator is plenty. A lifetime limit of 10 years max for any one person in Congress is more than enough, I think. If we restructure the rules for how to finance a campaign (making it less expensive), more people who are perfectly capable for the job could run for office.

    And we would have to do away with lifetime retirement checks. What a waste.

    Answer by May-20 at 12:45 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I am torn on separating the allowed terms. I agree that we shouldn't be having people campaign while they are supposed to be working (just watching Boxer on the news all month has been driving me mad!), but what if they are doing good work, should we stop them midstream?

    So... term limits for both house and senate, lower pay, no retirement fund (it's not a job, after all, it's a public service), campaign spending limits.... how do we get this accomplished? The supreme court ruled several years ago that states can't place term limits on federal reps... and they're certainly not going to put limits on themselves without great pressure. So, what do we do??

    Comment by LeanneC (original poster) at 1:29 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I agree with depressed.

    Answer by Sisteract at 2:57 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I agree with May...maximum of 10 years in an elected official allow for a member of Congress to serve as President, if they should decide to run and win.

    Answer by LoriKeet at 7:43 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

  • I do not agree with term limits for anything but President. We have the power of the vote if we want them to remain or not.

    Answer by goodwitch399 at 8:46 PM on Oct. 29, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.