Term Limits for the Federal Government

Washington Your argument regarding Washington stepping down proves nothing. I'm not sure how from two letters you can extrapolate that Washington was in favor of term limits. IncumbentSuccess RateA 99% success rate for incumbents being re-elected also does absolutely nothing for being infavor of term limits. These incumbents are not installed bydefault. They have to be elected. If the constituents of a particular area feel that their representative represents their interests, they should be free tore-elect him or her unlimited times. To say they can't merely stifles the citizens' freedom of choice. Senority SystemDo you know any organization where senority has no perks? These politicans who have gained senority havedone so by producing results for their constituents. If they havedone so through unethical or illegal means, there are hundreds of other House members or 99 otherSenators who can do the simple thing and not vote forthe bills that favor the corrupt representative's interests. PerksYou talk about these great perks that members of Congress receive. Again, very simple- if these perks are corrupting our politicians so much, we are free to vote them out. Maybe when they make their decisions to favor re-election, they help out their constituents. Do you disagree that the job of the representative is to represent the interests of their constituents? They are not there to represent the rest of the country, merely their voting district. While this may seem selfish, every voting district has their respective representatives with as much power to cast a vote as the others. Eliminate the perks, institute term limits, and then what? The politicians don't have much time to do what they want, so they spend money with no accountability- after all they can't be fired when their time is numbered from the second they get elected. When it comes to looking good in a restricted term limit, why wouldn't they? Their time is short in the public spotlight. They need to do what they can while they're there. After all, they will need a job once they get out. Lets also not forget, if a politican's time is limited, they wil do everything they can to get as much money for their district as possible. Pork barrell spending would go throught the roof. How would they pay for this all? The way government always does, borrow the money. Debt would spiral out of control. After all, if we have term limits, nobody is around long enough to be responsible for reckless spending. If you have 5 minutes in a bank vault, you'll grab as much money as you can. If you're told you could be there for a long time, you'll defend it vigorously. Your List1. Voters prefer term limits, but they also prefer free money. Should they be given it just because they think its a good idea?2. There is no merit without senority. Why would anybody work hard to gain merit, when they could just make alliances to push their own agendas through? (Vote for my bill and I'll vote for yours). 3. New challengers, yes. New ideas, not necessarily. A successful vote that gets voted out can merely endorse his replacement and pull the strings of their puppet. 4, The most affective way to create a citizen Congress is to decentralize it. There are very few "career" politicans on the non-federal level, because there is too much accountability, and it usually pays little or nothing. If you are arguing for pay limits for Congress, I'll agree with you 110% on that. 5. Special interests will always exist. There is no way to break this. As long as the federal government has a bottomless purse, there will always be people slobbering at their feet to get their handout. 6. I don't see how term limits will encourage principaled voting. Anybody who has a finite time limit on anything acts more recklessly. 7. Fresh thinkers can be voted in at any time. Some voters don't want fresh thinkers, they want their politician that produces results. And most don't care if those results come at the expense of other voting districts, they don't live there. 8. If anything, this increases the power of lobbies. What is more enticing than a lobbyist going to a Congressman saying "vote for this unpopular bill, it helps us, and we have a desk and a 6 figure job waiting for you after you get voted out." 9. Term limits would INCREASE federal spending. These limited politicians will have to get as much for their constituents as possible in a short period. Ring up that Bank of China credit card, Nowheretown USA needs 10 new schools and 10 new bridges to nowhere. Vote for my useless spending bill and I'll vote for yours. 10. Lower taxes, yes. They want to look good. But with the increased spending, the debt will spiral out of control even worse. When it comes to greater voter participation, I don't know how term limits will encourage this. Most don't care about elections. That is scene by the paltry participation rates in elections. Most people don't want to be bothered by them. 11. This is a matter of perspective. 12. Rotation is a good thing, but only if the voters want that rotation, as opposed to being forced to accept it.