Heaven or Hell

[HankB]

. . . You know, I used to share your opinion until my 80 old mother became a mayor of a small town. I watched her work her tail off making it a better place to live, (and for no pay...)

It's the 99% of politicians who are corrupt lowlifes (and worse!) who make the rest look bad . . .

[Liberty]

How would term limits make things better? Why would a politician become more virtuous knowing he will be out of a job in 2-8 years (depending on position)?

Perhaps there would be more people running to serve, and fewer people seeking to make a career of politics.

[The Annoyed Man]

How would term limits make things better? Why would a politician become more virtuous knowing he will be out of a job in 2-8 years (depending on position)?

Because - according to the founders - it is not a job. It is a service mission, for which they are duly compensated during their term of service. It was never intended to be a career. When this nation was founded, honorable men had other careers. Politics was merely an avocation for a pool of individual citizens from whom voters elected their representation to serve for a time - not forever. When honor fled the avocation, entitlement and avarice filled the vacuum. Many politicians today seem to feel entitled to the positions in which they serve, and therefore entitled to the benefits thereof... ...and shame on you or me for ever questioning their divine right to their thrones.

[bnc]

John Adams was on the spot:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of politicians qualify as "other", to put it nicely. While I agree with you on what a politician should be and how the Founders intended us to serve in the government, the negative aspects of man's nature seem to be too much to overcome. If men were honorable and decent enough to run a good government, we wouldn't really need a government at all.

I'll agree that having term limits makes it easier for decent people who do not want to be career politicians to hold office since they won't have to compete against a well-entrenched incumbent.

The problem I have is what politicians will do once in office. In our current system I think it is safe to say that we are all very angry over the corruption, bribes, and graft that our representatives participate in. Voters, at least institutionally, have leverage over politicians who wish to maintain their privileged positions. If they don't meet our expectations, we can vote them out. Just as the king, to have his reign last his lifetime and his house to carry on after him, must avoid angering the commoners too much, the politician who wants to reign (sadly appropriate) for a long time must also restrain himself to some extent.

If term limits are instituted, once politicians are elected we have no recourse against them. Other than stirring up noise with protests and heated town hall meetings and the like, there is really nothing we can use to influence their actions, no constitution mechanism with which to apply pressure. With no chance of reelection and no reason to satisfy their constituents I'm afraid that the ideologically motivated will do their damage as quickly as they can (like ramming CommieCare down our throats) and the corrupt will immediately whore themselves out to every special interest, union, and business willing to pay them. The corrupt will especially be eager to sell their legislative services to outside interests to that they can secure themselves a nice board position when their terms are complete.

While the negative aspects of politics mentioned in the above paragraph are certainly already prevalent, I don't see term limits making it any better, and could actually make it worse. I still cringe from the last few months of the Bush administration, especially when the financial bubble was popped. Maybe he wouldn't have been so willing to "abandon free market principles in order to save it" if he was up for reelection. Granted, I'll argue that there is precious little resembling "free market principles" in our economy, but that is a different thread entirely.

In summary, since I do not think it is possible to change man's nature, I think the best route to avoid tyranny is to reduce and limit the power of the government in which men exist. Any time the question of governmental power arises I ask myself "what if my opponents, the opponents of liberty, wield this power?", "what then when I'm the minority?" Once the precedence for power is set it is nearly impossible to revoke, therefore if there is government power I would not entrust to my enemy, I must not grant it to my ally.

[CaptWoodrow10]

I tend to agree with bnc on the term limit issue.
One possible solution would be to reduce their financial incentive. Cut their pay down to a level that still allows them to support themselves and their families, but make it a number where they can't get rich on it either. Since they are public record, you can look up congressional pay levels, and many of them are outrageous! What's worse is that they will continue to receive that salary even after they are out of office. Don't get me wrong here, they have/are serving their country and are entitled to just compensation, but I think my idea of just compensation are a little different than those in Washington. I also like the way we do it here in Texas. The legislature only meets every two years unless they are called into a special session, and most if not all of the members have a regular job.

All that being said, I still feel like the only real solution is to vote every chance you get.

/(rant)

[Liberty]

I tend to agree with bnc on the term limit issue.
One possible solution would be to reduce their financial incentive. Cut their pay down to a level that still allows them to support themselves and their families, but make it a number where they can't get rich on it either. Since they are public record, you can look up congressional pay levels, and many of them are outrageous! What's worse is that they will continue to receive that salary even after they are out of office. Don't get me wrong here, they have/are serving their country and are entitled to just compensation, but I think my idea of just compensation are a little different than those in Washington. I also like the way we do it here in Texas. The legislature only meets every two years unless they are called into a special session, and most if not all of the members have a regular job.

All that being said, I still feel like the only real solution is to vote every chance you get.

/(rant)

It isn't their salaries they are getting rich on. Some state Legislators manage to improve their finances on their $600 a month job. The perqs and bribes are where the real money is at.

[i8godzilla]

I tend to agree with bnc on the term limit issue.
One possible solution would be to reduce their financial incentive. Cut their pay down to a level that still allows them to support themselves and their families, but make it a number where they can't get rich on it either. Since they are public record, you can look up congressional pay levels, and many of them are outrageous! What's worse is that they will continue to receive that salary even after they are out of office. Don't get me wrong here, they have/are serving their country and are entitled to just compensation, but I think my idea of just compensation are a little different than those in Washington. I also like the way we do it here in Texas. The legislature only meets every two years unless they are called into a special session, and most if not all of the members have a regular job.

All that being said, I still feel like the only real solution is to vote every chance you get.

/(rant)

It isn't their salaries they are getting rich on. Some state Legislators manage to improve their finances on their $600 a month job. The perqs and bribes are where the real money is at.

Did you know that it is NOT illegal for members of Congress (or their staff) to engage in 'insider trading'?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 20172.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edited to add link.

[CaptWoodrow10]

I tend to agree with bnc on the term limit issue.
One possible solution would be to reduce their financial incentive. Cut their pay down to a level that still allows them to support themselves and their families, but make it a number where they can't get rich on it either. Since they are public record, you can look up congressional pay levels, and many of them are outrageous! What's worse is that they will continue to receive that salary even after they are out of office. Don't get me wrong here, they have/are serving their country and are entitled to just compensation, but I think my idea of just compensation are a little different than those in Washington. I also like the way we do it here in Texas. The legislature only meets every two years unless they are called into a special session, and most if not all of the members have a regular job.

All that being said, I still feel like the only real solution is to vote every chance you get.

/(rant)

It isn't their salaries they are getting rich on. Some state Legislators manage to improve their finances on their $600 a month job. The perqs and bribes are where the real money is at.

Point well taken. I still like the idea of "capping" their wages though. And we can't really prevent the corruption found in government with anything short of voting them out. Even that is only a reactionary measure, and will not eliminate it. I've always said that the person I want most to represent me in congress is the person who doesn't want to. Not because they don't care or because they aren't fully capable, but because they are truly humble and fear that their actions won't matter. I'd vote for them seven days a week and twice on Sunday. (As long as I agree with their platform of course)