Congressional Term Limit

[Nikita2Charles 33]

With so many politician in Washing making a career out of messing up the American People and Filling up their Pockets with little Gifts from The LOBBYIST.

Should Congress IMPOSE ITSELF A TERM LIMIT

Just like the president, 2 Term each and move on.

I've talked to a few people and some of them said, it's the people that keep sending those same goons that are to blame, it's just a reflection of ourselves.

[Darnell 8,479]

I think 1 term. Period. Without the chance to run again, regardless of party, affiliation, location or 'which house'.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

No term limits. Some people are very good at their jobs and it would be a shame to lose them. If a rep sucks, the people always have the choice to vote them out.

I'd much rather see all campaigns publicly financed to give the underdog candidates a real shot. What I don't want to see is a good man/woman forced out because of an arbitrary term limit.

[Scott & Lai 12]

With so many politician in Washing making a career out of messing up the American People and Filling up their Pockets with little Gifts from The LOBBYIST.

If the government didn't have benies to give out, the lobbyists wouldn't be giving the politicians gifts in exchange for them...

If a rep sucks, the people always have the choice to vote them out.

Actually, only the people in the rep's district/state can vote them out, yet they can have a huge impact on residents outside their district/state.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Actually, only the people in the rep's district/state can vote them out, yet they can have a huge impact on residents outside their district/state.

That is how the system is designed.

[Scott & Lai 12]

That is how the system is designed.

I am aware of that, but your argument against term limits was that "the People" can always vote out reps who suck. I'm pointing out that only some of the affected "people" have that ability.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I am aware of that, but your argument against term limits was that "the People" can always vote out reps who suck. I'm pointing out that only some of the affected "people" have that ability.

The people that rep represents are the only people who matter.

[Nessa 23]

no term limit

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Yes, 3--formed due to my having lived in Canada where MP's who "serve" for 6 years would be pensioned at full-indexed salary (even if they were removed through ballot)!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No term limits. Some people are very good at their jobs and it would be a shame to lose them. If a rep sucks, the people always have the choice to vote them out.

I'd much rather see all campaigns publicly financed to give the underdog candidates a real shot. What I don't want to see is a good man/woman forced out because of an arbitrary term limit.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

I say 3. It would give a good representative a chance to get something done and would limit the damage a bad but popular one can do.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I would say 3 terms for a Rep. and maybe 1-2 terms for a Senator. I think its painfully obvious that both also need age limits - either 65 or 69. You can't really argue that it shouldn't be done because the system was designed that way. The precedent is already there in regards to the Oval Office.

[Leafgal 3]

No limit, that is what the voting process is for.

[The_Dude 1,142]

We already have term-limits, they are called elections.

[NickD 203]

Since congress makes the laws, not very likely they are going to vote themselves out of a job. Nor will they do anything about election reform to cut their under the table income. So why even bother having a poll.

While a new congressman may vow to change the world, with the hierarchy in both the senate and congress, the only thing he can do when he gets to Washington DC is to get coffee for the ones that are already there. Really don't want to vote out a guy that been there a long time from your state, very good at bringing other states money back to your state.