Term limits for congress is pretty popular, but has detractors who feel that the experience is lost and that "good people" in congress are also kicked out in addition to the bad ones.
Personally I think these are non-arguments. Yes, good politicians will be kicked out, and if they are truly good, then they will have no problem being elected into other positions. That's all the more reason to have them kicked out since we need to have them in other areas as well. And yes, the experience of how to run congress is lost. Those who specialize in different committees will be rotated out. And that's fine. The reason that is fine is that those "specialized" congressmen may have the experience and knowledge, but that also leads to corruption since they become TOO familiar with the committees.
What we truly lack right now is a congress that knows how to work together. There are different ideas from all walks of life. No single ideology is perfect for everybody. That's why we negotiate, come up with ways to try out the different ideas and see what works best FOR THE NATION. Instead, what we have are congressmen that get entrenched into the committees where they protect their pet projects that help get them reelected. Then they do favors for other congressmen so that other bills they want passed can get those those committees. It's really become a "scratch my back and I scratch yours" type system. That is NOT good for the nation. It's only good for the congressmen. Sure, I'd like everything in government run how I indicate. But I also know that not everybody has the same feelings. So instead of digging a deep trench and hunkering down, securing positions on the left or right, congress needs to figure out how to negotiate again. And I think all this old blood is going to prevent that from being changed because they LIKE the way they are as was evidenced by the reaction to the recent incumbency losses.
So here's what I propose. Senators are already in for 6 years. I think that's enough. Yep, one term, with 1/3 of the senate replaced each year as is the current voting schedule. That puts each senator in a higher seat of seniority every 2 years. So the most "powerful" committees then are chaired by someone with 4 years of experience behind their belt. The house of representatives should have two allowed reelections. That means they also would be limited to 6 years total service in the house.
So what happens to the "good politicians"
6 years in the state legislature (or 12 depending on how the state's legislature is formed), 6 years in the house, 6 years in the senate, 8 years as a governor, and up to 8 years as president. That's still too many years leading government and not enough experience working in the private sector. But it's a good start to the limitation.
But this has been tried before. Politicians get elected promising term limits and then renege on their promise. How do you get a bunch of politicians who campaign on term limits and then vote against them to stick to their word?
Construct a term limit bill first that passes legal muster and addresses the "problems" that other term limit bills have had. This is done OUTSIDE of congress by we the people. Once a fairly agreeable bill is written, then write up a legal contract stating that the undersigned person has the legal obligation to vote for the bill in the form it is posted and not amend it or alter it in any way. Amendments and alterations to the bill by others in congress who haven't signed the agreement must voted against, we won't accept a watered down or filled with exclusions version. It will also require the person to follow the bill as it is proposed originally, regardless of whether or not it was passed. Allow for collection of donations into a trust fund to be used toward the cause of electing people who support the bill. Anybody who signs the contract who does not follow it will be liable for the full amount donated to their election, plus a large punitive amount. Those will then go back into the trust fund to elect others who will sign the contract, or legally pursue those that signed it and then went back on their word. There would be a website identifying those candidates and politicians who have signed the contract, which would be a benefit for those running for office to show their level of commitment.
Yep, it would be a genuine contract with penalty clauses. If Americans believe in term limits, they'll fund the trust and the whole concept will get passed. If a legitimate problem is found within the bill, then it can be modified by we the people and the politicians can sign an amended contract identifying the new bill in its new form.
In fact, this is a good way to get any popular bill passed that congress seems unwilling to do. Like how about a bill that says congress is subject to the same laws that we are. Originally congress was exempt from certain laws to prevent policemen from detaining them from a vote, for instance. Well, with today's technology the congressmen can vote from his or her jail cell. So requiring them to live under the same laws they pass for the rest of us (like the health care plan) seems like it should be reasonable.
No comments:
Post a Comment