Age restrictions for Congress?

User avatar
Ex-California
Posts: 4116
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by Ex-California » Fri Oct 20, 2017 9:43 pm

Fife wrote:1 term per person and immediate family per position.

Anyone with any downside to that; chime in, let's discuss.
This is how I think it should be ran as well.

Term lengths should be a little longer than they are now so there's less incentive to cash in
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session

User avatar
doc_loliday
Posts: 2443
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:10 am

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by doc_loliday » Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:43 am

Fife wrote:1 term per person and immediate family per position.

Anyone with any downside to that; chime in, let's discuss.

Inherited guilt doesn't seem your style.

User avatar
StCapps
Posts: 16879
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by StCapps » Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:00 am

Term limits will prevent keeping good legislators for longer than the term limit, I don't see the upside.

All you are doing is stopping Americans from voting for incumbents you don't like, so that they turn around and elect non-incumbents that you don't like, how does that solve anything? This will merely increase the turnover of politicians doing favors for their campaign contributors so they can get a kushy job once their term limit is over.

Change just for the sake of change, it might make you feel like you've done something important, but all you are doing is fooling yourself.
Last edited by StCapps on Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
*yip*

Zlaxer
Posts: 5377
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 5:04 am

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by Zlaxer » Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:05 am

StCapps wrote:Term limits will prevent keeping good legislators for longer than the term limit, I don't see the upside.

All you are doing is stopping Americans from voting for incumbents you don't like, so that they turn around and elect non-incumbents that you don't like, how does that solve anything?
Changing the spoil helps prevent mold from growing....

User avatar
StCapps
Posts: 16879
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by StCapps » Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:05 am

Zlaxer wrote:
StCapps wrote:Term limits will prevent keeping good legislators for longer than the term limit, I don't see the upside.

All you are doing is stopping Americans from voting for incumbents you don't like, so that they turn around and elect non-incumbents that you don't like, how does that solve anything?
Changing the spoil helps prevent mold from growing....
The incumbents will simply be replaced by new legislators who had very similar positions to the incumbents, while the incumbents move on to a kushy job in the private sector, even quicker than they are right now. Little will change, all you are doing is playing musical chairs, to make it feel like you're doing something.
/shrugs

Putting term limits on Congress will not make it suck any less, that's half baked wishful thinking.
*yip*

User avatar
Fife
Posts: 15157
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by Fife » Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:44 am

doc_loliday wrote:
Fife wrote:1 term per person and immediate family per position.

Anyone with any downside to that; chime in, let's discuss.

Inherited guilt doesn't seem your style.

Maybe so; the real objective is making the job something that is an inconvenience endured for service to the community rather than a slop-trough in perpetuity. At least something closer to that end of the spectrum, anyway.

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by clubgop » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:00 pm

StCapps wrote:
Zlaxer wrote:
StCapps wrote:Term limits will prevent keeping good legislators for longer than the term limit, I don't see the upside.

All you are doing is stopping Americans from voting for incumbents you don't like, so that they turn around and elect non-incumbents that you don't like, how does that solve anything?
Changing the spoil helps prevent mold from growing....
The incumbents will simply be replaced by new legislators who had very similar positions to the incumbents, while the incumbents move on to a kushy job in the private sector, even quicker than they are right now. Little will change, all you are doing is playing musical chairs, to make it feel like you're doing something.
/shrugs

Putting term limits on Congress will not make it suck any less, that's half baked wishful thinking.
Less institutional knowledge means less servicing of interests. Hiring that individual, sure. Hiring that person's child, spouse? Less likely. Good politicians are like all public servants, take it from Harvey Dent.
You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

User avatar
Ex-California
Posts: 4116
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by Ex-California » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:28 am

StCapps wrote:Term limits will prevent keeping good legislators for longer than the term limit, I don't see the upside.

All you are doing is stopping Americans from voting for incumbents you don't like, so that they turn around and elect non-incumbents that you don't like, how does that solve anything? This will merely increase the turnover of politicians doing favors for their campaign contributors so they can get a kushy job once their term limit is over.

Change just for the sake of change, it might make you feel like you've done something important, but all you are doing is fooling yourself.
How often do we have a good legislator? 1 out of 100? 1 out of 500?
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session

User avatar
StCapps
Posts: 16879
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by StCapps » Sun Oct 22, 2017 6:41 am

California wrote:
StCapps wrote:Term limits will prevent keeping good legislators for longer than the term limit, I don't see the upside.

All you are doing is stopping Americans from voting for incumbents you don't like, so that they turn around and elect non-incumbents that you don't like, how does that solve anything? This will merely increase the turnover of politicians doing favors for their campaign contributors so they can get a kushy job once their term limit is over.

Change just for the sake of change, it might make you feel like you've done something important, but all you are doing is fooling yourself.
How often do we have a good legislator? 1 out of 100? 1 out of 500?
So throw em out and replace em' with someone worse, that'll make congress better.
:roll:
*yip*

User avatar
StCapps
Posts: 16879
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: Age restrictions for Congress?

Post by StCapps » Sun Oct 22, 2017 6:48 am

clubgop wrote:Less institutional knowledge means less servicing of interests. Hiring that individual, sure. Hiring that person's child, spouse? Less likely. Good politicians are like all public servants, take it from Harvey Dent.
You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
Except less time in office will not turn them into heroes. In order to be successful it is almost a prerequisite that you are a villain and rotating villains isn't going solve anything, except make sure the heroes don't stick around as long when they do happen to come along. Preventing the accumulation of expertise does not result in less corruption, it just gives the lobbyists people who are easier to manipulate when the revolving door hits the less corrupt ones on the way out.

The problem is not term limits, it's that Americans keep voting for the same kind of politicians, and term limits will not cause them to step their voting game up, it will just mean they will switch villains at the end of the term limit. More turnover will not fix the issues you think it will, it might even exacerbate those issues, so be careful what you wish for.
*yip*