• YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Absolutely not, I believe term limits give more power to lobby groups. If voters every two to six years feel their Congressional representation is doing well why should they be punished by term limits. I’d rather we open the door to Congressional Recalls for House and Senate members.

    • Tb0n3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And if they’re fine voting in a dementia sufferer because they recognize her name on the ballot? That’s the biggest problem currently is uninformed voters just keep voting the same people in. Not because they like what they’re doing but because they recognize the name.

      • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The voters choose their representative, but the parties put who is on the ticket. I’m not a fan of Bobert but her district voted her into office twice. That’s on them. If they vote in Mickey Mouse then they live with that choice.

    • AngrilyEatingMuffins@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Incumbents have huge advantages naturally (voter recognition, experience to point to, pork projects passed, the machine behind them, etc, etc. so term limits are much more likely to result in the will of the people being heard.

      • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I do believe we need checks on the Supreme Court and whether that be a term limit or a Presidential review every four years, off cycle of the Presidential election, either works.

        Term limits work well for unelected positions. Judges are a perfect example of that.