Yeah, still not nearly sufficient (and not plausible for the Senate, which have 6-year terms).
In almost any line of work, I'd say that 8 years is an insufficient amount of time to become an expert, let alone to utilize that acquired expertise.
I could certainly accept campaign finance reform measures and ways of restricting power of lobbyists. And I could accept, say, a 24 year term limit. But 8 is WAY too short. As is 12.
Put me in the group that is staunchly opposed to term limits. I think relationships actually do matter in the Senate. Plus there really aren't that many people capable of doing the job of senator and placing a functional limit on how long they can serve just means we would be promoting lots of morons into positions they can't handle. In general, I think the Senate does a fairly good job of maintaining their reputation as the greatest deliberative body in the world.
Favorite Son-In-Law Jared has a law degree. Since he was tasked with solving all of the world's other great problems short of going into a lab and developing the Covid vaccine, he could also represent dearest father-in-law. Interestingly, his Wiki page says that he interned in the Manhattan DA's office under the last DA. Now they are coming after Trump.
Never joke about a nation that makes up an animal specifically to scare away people when they already have the top thousand+ most deadly animals!
I agree completely, CDu. If you impose term limits, you are handing much of the decision-making of the Congress over to the more than 20,000 members of the Congressional staff plus a large cadre of career officials in the Executive Branch. I think we should rely on the elected representatives of the people.
By the way, there is much corroborating evidence on this subject from states, like Colorado, who have imposed (by plebiscite) severe term limits.
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
I'm pretty sure that Trump had articles filed against him early as well; they just never went anywhere. Specifically I'm thinking of Al Green, who gave it a shot three times before impeachment was actually taken up as a vote on the floor. I think members of "the squad" had threatened to, or actually did, also.
Found this article on Green.
https://www.texastribune.org/2019/12...democrats-now/
Edit...kinda funny given both of their last names.
Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."
Um, son-in-law is on the outs too. (reported 1-1-21, meeting occurred in August)
https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...ng-nyt-2020-12"I'm going to lose," Trump said according to The Times. "And it's going to be your fault, because of the testing."
I agree. It appears there's little support for term limits in this thread, but the arguments for, in my opinion, definitely outweigh the arguments against. I doubt the Founding Fathers were anticipating a congress full of career politicians. Most politicians focus on fundraising for re-election as soon as they are elected, and the pursuit of campaign dollars is nonstop. Their votes on most any issue (take yesterday's impeachment vote as an example) are based on what best for their re-election chances, not what's principled, or best for their district, state, or the country.
As for taking 8+ years to build up expertise - nah. Congress members have able staff, as do the committees - staff with subject matter expertise and expertise in the machinations of legislating. Also, there's no shortage of expertise in the form of nonprofits and think tanks (not all are lobbyists) on issues of the day.
Perhaps term limits will attract folks looking to serve the people and not their party; to make a difference, rather than just build personal power. Maybe term limits won't improve anything, but it's worth a shot. Can't be a lot worse.