dagblog - Comments for "The 28th Amendment"

I've always felt the House is

Beetlejuice — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:36:55 +0000

In reply to I'd say they probably felt

I've always felt the House is more inline with the British House of Commons and the Senate the House of Lords. In fact, the method by which Senators were appointed before the 17th Amendment was a close to creating a lordship class within the US. I can even go a step further in askng if the British Parliament requires term limits on their elected and appointed representatives.

I'd say they probably felt

Atheist — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:22:21 +0000

In reply to So term limits is back as

I'd say they probably felt the longer one held office at the pleasure of their constitutients the better they were able to take care of the wants needs and desires of the state they represented.

I'm no historian, but I'd say that George Washington made it pretty clear that he felt the opposite of that, given his "no kings" stance. Of course, George was also against the formation of political parties. Alas, none of his successors felt the same…

So term limits is back as

Beetlejuice — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:18:44 +0000

In reply to The 28th Amendment

So term limits is back as another political distraction, eh? Well, can someone point out where the founding fathers discussed whether or not a Congress critters term of office should or should not have time restrictions? I don't believe the thought entered their minds. I'd say they probably felt the longer one held office at the pleasure of their constitutients the better they were able to take care of the wants needs and desires of the state they represented. IMO, all talk of term limits is nothing more than political sour grapes...our guy can't get elected cause the incumbant has it locked up tighter than a drum. Well, all locks have keys.

Rather than shifting to

Atheist — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:04:13 +0000

In reply to In general, I'm against

Rather than shifting to proportional representation (or in addition to), I'd first like to see us switch to some form of rank-ordering voting. That way, we can all vote for our favorite 3rd party candidate without worrying about "throwing our vote away".

Hmmm was not aware of that.

Orion — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 11:55:12 +0000

In reply to Oops, knew something wrong -

Hmmm was not aware of that.

After a period of time,

AmiBlue — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:35:06 +0000

In reply to For several reasons, this is

After a period of time, constituents come to know and trust their elected representatives and thus are less likely to fall prey to the expensive propaganda top corporate managers use to gull the public into electing bad candidates.

I see this trust in representatives as just the opposite. Voters are more likely to be lulled and gulled by automatically electing the same old guy time after time. The lobbyists know them much better than the voters do and know how to manipulate them.

I wouldn't expect the jerks

AmiBlue — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:29:29 +0000

In reply to The State of Idaho has the

I wouldn't expect the jerks to limit themselves voluntarily and stick with it. These jobs are too cushy and too easy to make into sinecures like I hear Boner (and others I'm sure) has done. That's why I believe the term limits should be a constitutional amendment, just like the presidential limits.

I was hoping you were going to tell us how successful the project had been. I dislike Initiatives and referendums. They're what has gotten CA into so much trouble. But that's a subject for another blog.

Publically financed elections

AmiBlue — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:22:32 +0000

In reply to Ultimately, I don't like term

Publically financed elections with no private money? And how far do you think that would get with this SCOTUS, Des? 401(k)s and Social Security. Their interestes would be much more aligned with yours and mine if they had to deal with the same system, wouldn't they?

Interesting, Orion. I

AmiBlue — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:17:48 +0000

In reply to Chile has really strict term

Interesting, Orion. I thought their current president was decidedly conservative, though.

Rotation is a nice way of

AmiBlue — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 01:16:33 +0000

In reply to Interesting, and I do wonder

Rotation is a nice way of looking at it, tmac. For instance, I see very few (if any) Democrats who are ready to run for president in 2016. If you have to find new people to run for congress every 12 years or less, you would be more inclined to be looking for new people and grooming them to step in when the time is right. As it is now we just have a good ol' boy system with the stagnant thinking that goes with it.