Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (132574)	3/20/2001 10:53:20 PM
From: Roger A. Babb	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Michael, term limits will NEVER be passed by the politicians who are already IN office, we learned that lesson in 1996. The only way to pass term limits would be to put it on the ballot for the voters to decide. On second thought, that won't work either because the darn politicians count the votes and the last election proved that getting the most votes can be overturned by those in control of the count. Bottom line: term limits have no chance and those in power will find ways to stay in power. Gee, I am feeling cynical tonight. "The only thing worse than a vote-rigging Republican is a pardon-selling Democrat."

To: greenspirit who wrote (132574)	3/21/2001 1:17:26 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 769667

The advantages of incumbency can be reduced or eliminated without term limits. Franking? Completely eliminate it. Or cut it off 1 year before an election. Or if you use franking for political puffing, 10 years and $10,000 fine each incident. And after 2 terms, you can only spend $2 in a campaign for each $3 your opponent spends. And it continues to fall after that. Can't get this through Congress? Then what chance does a term limits constitutional amendment have? And isn't there something to be said for experience and stability in government? And if you know you will only have an office for 2 terms, well, use your terms for all their worth. No sense worrying about the long term. Today, politicians are rewarded by distancing themselves from their constituents. You think this is new? What happened in the 18th and 19th centuries when it could take weeks to get back home? It should be a temporary position, not a life-long position. Isn't there something to be said for experience and stability in government? Are bureaucrats to be the only ones with careers in government? You know who will be running the government then- -even more than now. With a pension plan second to none, and pay and perks reserved to former King and Queens. It's no wonder so many of them are corrupted by the power of the position. These ae separate issues from term limits. We need to turnover the House and Senate and get more people to serve who have come from the private sector. Who still understand what it means to meet a payroll, drive in traffic jams, and struggle to find a decent public school for their children. This is still a democratic republic. Vote 'em out!