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: Kevin Rose who wrote (134085)	3/29/2001 2:07:06 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

As a conservative, I am a fink on term limits. I think we will get a poorer crop of legislators, because there are not many people suited to take the job to begin with, because it will harm institutional memory and the amassing of experience, and because it will further complicate people's career calculations. Term limits for the executive (president and governors) make greater sense since they have extraordinary power to use the mechanisms of government for personal and partisan advantage. Even then, I am a little dubious.......

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (134085)	3/30/2001 1:18:42 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

res-Question: will term limits promote a better or lesser crop of candidates? Now that is a tough question. I don't think anybody really knows for sure. But I'll take a stab and answer it in this way. Too many people today in politics live in a bubble, disconnected from the people. They see the Washington World of politics and issues, and think it's the "peoples" world. All too often, just the opposite is true. Now, one could say "the people are wrong", and they might have a point. I would say the people instinctively understand something doesn't quite smell right in Washington D.C. and a good part of the reason why is because it's a protective class of perk lovers. Hell bent on retaining power (at all costs) in order to stay there. I also think it would be a healthy thing to have more people who've worked in the private sector involved in political decision making. We're gradually setting up a system where some people work in politics their entire life, and most others work in the private sector. How one can truly related to the other, when their visions of the world are shaped so differently, is open to serious discussion and debate. Another question to raise is this...Did our founding fathers envision a system where one class of people would rule, while another class created the jobs and prosperity of the nation? I don't think so. I believe the founding fathers thought people would serve for a very limited amount of time, then return to their private sector ambitions. The reason term limits make sense for the President, are the same reason term limits make sense for congress. Sure, you could make a strong case that a life-long President would have a stronger grasp of foreign affairs, how the congress is run, and a deeper knowledge of how to manage the office of President. As you could with congress. Yet, And how many of us today would rather go back to electing, or not electing a President for life? I doubt very many. Michael