Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Actually, it doesn't take much money to get on a ballot. Vote for someone you never heard of. It will get all the incumbants out.

That's how Obama got in.

Workinman Loc: Bayou Pigeon

They are traitors but I must say they are Muslim traitors attacking us from within ...explain why the border is still open with the threat of ISIS... Maybe part of the plan?

Workinman Loc: Bayou Pigeon

And the reason we need campaign funding reform..hey these clowns work for us about time they realize it..except the people have let them run unchecked...time for change don't you think?

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

You do understand that elected officials use assistants, secretaries, and researchers, who are not elected to help them with their tasks. Right?

Term limits is a law that if you like your representative you cannot keep him representing you. Means that you cannot vote for him, if he has reached his limit. The power of the voter is negated.
Because of the temporary nature of the position, political capital cannot be gained over years of faithfully representing his constituents. Nor can a person, who has the ability to succeed in business view a cut in pay for a temporary position. The first two years in a legislative is spent learning the ins and outs of the system and relying heavily upon unelected assistants, secretaries, and researchers. With such short tenure do you suppose the tradition of removing such persons continuing over from one politician to another is increased or decreased?

The fact is these unelected positions begin to consolidate political capital and the elected official becomes a mere figure head

ghostgotcha Loc: The Florida swamps

If I might offer a thought or two about term limits. Just to keep perspective.

It is noted that you are talking about politicians who are elected...

If you will also remember.... Lois Lerner with the IRS is not bound by term limits, nor are her bosses. Nor or any federal employees that I can think of.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

That's' true, although the enemy you mention as dividing us, are not foreign powers, they are the dems and repubs. Separately, they agree with needing to take back our country from the clowns in DC, but collectively, they still insist that THEIR party is the only way. They can list so many reasons why the OTHER party is the problem and why theirs is the solution.

I have tried to point this out on many occasions, with little success. No one likes to be wrong and coming to believe that your own party is part of the problem, is just too much to contemplate. Politicians know this and capitalize on it, keeping people stirred up. They know also, that if folks ever decided to think for themselves, they'd ALL be out of power and to them, THAT'S too much to contemplate.

The confusion, hopelessness, anger and all the other emotions partisan fighting causes, is just collateral damage that politicians are willing for US to suffer - in order to maintain their power and standard of living.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Unfortunately the trade off doesn't work.

Term limits will keep these politicians from doing more of what they have already done to us . If that means that there will be a similar turn over in assistants and researchers so be it. I seriously doubt that it took several election cycles for those people to become proficient at what they do and if it did they should have been gone long ago.

There is a break in period for any job and those who apply will be experienced. No one is going to hire a burger flipper for those positions.

No. Your reasoning is faulty. Getting these politicians out is primary. All else will follow but these people need to go and having to retrain staff is nit avreason to suffer them any longer.

It is also possible that many of those people will be held over from oneb office holder to the next. If you take big money out of politics there will be far less favors to repay.

dennisimoto Loc: Washington State (West)

For once, we agree on something, Nick.

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

Bravo sir ! well put

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

We have term limits already in that a politician cannot serve after he dies.

The big money gains power over new people and they don't have to pay as much. What happens to a politician when they leave office? What job can they get, except consulting for big money?

The final term of a term limited politician is without consequence to the politician in relation to the voter. But big money, well that's rather incentivizing, don't you think?

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Yeah and a constitutional amendment banning all but public money for campaigns, sounds good on paper. Who will decide how much money each candidate can have for each office? Will each office get the same amount of money? How many candidates for each office will we have to finance? Who will monitor this program and how will they enforce it? Too many questions have yet to be asked, much less answered, to simply state "money out of politics!".

It would be far easier and much more effective, for the electorate to do something about it themselves. It would require no amendments, nor any co-operation from any public official and no monitoring.

DO NOT vote for the candidate that has raised the most money - period. No matter what party, or who it is - don't vote for them. Vote for the person who has raised the LEAST amount of money. Now, before folk start going off about voting for someone they don't know, I'll remind folk that it's THEIR job - to get to know ALL the candidates - not just the one from their party, or the media picked "front runner".

After a few election cycles, the rich donors and the various national committees, will see that no amount of money - can get their person elected. They will be forced to take a new strategy, like qualified people to back, or even ordinary folks for candidates, instead of doctors, lawyers and business people. Wouldn't that be refreshing?

In any case, NOT voting for the big money, is a sure fire way to prevent big money from getting into the Government. Voting for the little money may get some knot head into office, but what would be different from what we have now? They certainly couldn't do any worse. So, I say, if you want big money out of politics - stop voting for it.

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

I suspect you are mistaken on that. Nothing short of getting government out of big money will get big money out of government.

Don G. Dinsdale Loc: El Cajon, CA (San Diego County)

I'm new to this forum, have been reading you'll for a spell... As to this "D.C." problem we all seem to agree "It's Broken!"... I see two basic types of folks in "D.C.", the elected ones and they do as has been stated trying to get re-elected and pay back the folks who paid to get them elected... Then there is the BIGGER monster, The Bureaucrats, they are self perpetuating... This of all the "alphabet" agencies for a starter, then add all the cabinet post and then the agency we never or hardly ever hear about and that's the PROBLEM!!! Two main groups trying to please others and themselves all at the same time... I don't think this will ever happen, BUT if "We the People" could take control of the elected lawmakers and have them do our bidding for one term and only use The Constitution & Bill of Rights as guides to governing, maybe things would change!!! Don D.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

You missed the point. Not voting big money INTO the Gov. has to be the first step to getting big money OUT. Sitting politicians who gather "gifts", will be voted out next cycle. As soon as it becomes clear that big money will be punished by the electorate, there is no longer an incentive to spend that money.

Once the "no big money" politicians are in office, THEN we can get lobbying out. The politicians will know that they'll be one term officers - if they accept the gifts that lobbyists use to ply their trade. It must start with the people refusing to be bought.

stan3186

You of course are correct. The only way that those financing changes can be made it through a constitutional convention which will never happen as long as the people who are in charge stay in charge. We really do need to find a way to get rid of most if not all of the current day politicians. That in theory could be done by voting out all incumbents, but I don't believe that will ever happen because all of the elections are fixed. The only way to "unfixed" the elections is for each state to require paper ballots that are physically counted by people with representatives of both parties overseeing the counts. Then we may actually have a true voter representative government. Then, maybe those new representatives would vote for a constitutional convention in which we could make wholesale changes and true term limits along with true campaign finance reform and which nobody can contribute more than "X" dollars. Along with outlawing any corporate are organizational contributions to any candidate.

All of this would go a long ways toward reforming our government turning the country back over to the people