Term limits for Congress and the Senate..
Oct 27, 2019 08:30:08 #
bggamers wrote:
need 38 states they have 28 is what I found
Thanks bqqamers, I don't see that happening very soon.
Oct 27, 2019 08:35:14 #
bggamers wrote:
need 38 states they have 28 is what I found
Thanks bggamers, Probably won't happen very soon.
Oct 27, 2019 08:51:29 #
bggamers
Loc: georgia
Hug wrote:
Thanks bqqamers, I don't see that happening very soon.
Their working on it but it takes time.I think this has been in the works for 4 or 5 years the time-consuming part the state has al sort of things they have to file and apply for if your interested look up the convention of states there is a lot you can learn you can join and help the movement.I your state has not become one you can help encourage it to and find like minded people to help
Oct 27, 2019 09:03:12 #
lpnmajor
Loc: Arkansas
proud republican wrote:
What do you guys think 8 to 10 years enough???
Yep. We also need a rule change that won't allow them to start drawing their Federal pension until they reach age 70.
Oct 27, 2019 09:18:09 #
proud republican wrote:
What do you guys think 8 to 10 years enough???
Great subject PR. I think two terms for the Senate (12 years) and four terms (8 years) is plenty.
Oct 27, 2019 11:26:13 #
Iliamna1 wrote:
Absolutely! ! ! There is so much corruption and m... (show quote)
My thought also was 3 & 2 since it takes some time to figure things out and make contacts if you hope to get anything done. After that, a Senator can run for the House & visa versa if they wish. I also think there should be a 'starting salary' with increases tied to the SS cost of living with each re-election up to the max.
They should also participate in SS & Medicare and a pension not to exceed 20% of the last salary.
Oct 27, 2019 11:41:07 #
proud republican wrote:
What do you guys think 8 to 10 years enough???
If I'm not mistaken, under the old Articles of Confederation before the present Constitution was adopted, members of the Continental Congress could serve only three years in any five year period. Now with House members serving 2 year terms and Senate serving 6, that would have to be adjusted. Say, two terms for house members, and having to take off one term before running again? Maybe the same pattern for senate? When you see how much of their Constitutional powers they have resigned and given to Presidents over the past 60 years, I wonder sometimes what we pay them for.
Oct 27, 2019 11:55:54 #
I also think if they are running for a higher office, they should resign from the position they hold before running for the higher office. If I were running for office, I could not put my job on hold until after the election, then go back to my job if I lost.
Oct 27, 2019 16:28:36 #
proud republican wrote:
What do you guys think 8 to 10 years enough???
I thought 6 years also, but without the props. They pay into Social Security like you and I because they will get no special pension or health care for the rest of their lives. No hush funds, no lobbyists. Just work all 5 days of the week.
Oct 27, 2019 17:10:06 #
Lonewolf wrote:
that's why i stopped voting a straight party line
Stop voting for incumbents. Nothing will change while the same douche bags of both parties remain in office term after term after term after term.......
Oct 27, 2019 21:20:55 #
Hug wrote:
One term for a Senator and 3 terms for a Representative to the House. If they can't get rich in 6 years, they shouldn't be in Washington.
And arrange it so only half or less are up for reelection at the same time so that there are always a portion of the chamber with some experience to maintain things.
Oct 27, 2019 21:49:12 #
bggamers
Loc: georgia
maryjane wrote:
And arrange it so only half or less are up for reelection at the same time so that there are always a portion of the chamber with some experience to maintain things.
Very good idea
Oct 27, 2019 22:03:54 #
Totally agree, but one step further. Why do we need so many congress people to start with.
I believe, but could be wrong, that when the founding fathers wrote the constitution adding additional congressmen based on population had no clue that a communication systems would evolve that would do away with that need. Congress does not have to travel and communicate from horseback anymore. I would think that about a third of what we now have would be sufficient.
I believe, but could be wrong, that when the founding fathers wrote the constitution adding additional congressmen based on population had no clue that a communication systems would evolve that would do away with that need. Congress does not have to travel and communicate from horseback anymore. I would think that about a third of what we now have would be sufficient.
Oct 27, 2019 22:29:49 #
proud republican wrote:
What do you guys think 8 to 10 years enough???
2 term max at each level. If you want to run for another position you must vacate your current one first. No retirement, and Medicare or private insurance
Oct 27, 2019 22:50:13 #
proud republican
Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
Phantom one wrote:
Totally agree, but one step further. Why do we need so many congress people to start with.
I believe, but could be wrong, that when the founding fathers wrote the constitution adding additional congressmen based on population had no clue that a communication systems would evolve that would do away with that need. Congress does not have to travel and communicate from horseback anymore. I would think that about a third of what we now have would be sufficient.
I believe, but could be wrong, that when the founding fathers wrote the constitution adding additional congressmen based on population had no clue that a communication systems would evolve that would do away with that need. Congress does not have to travel and communicate from horseback anymore. I would think that about a third of what we now have would be sufficient.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.