A good reason to limit politicians to one term

We should limit politicians such as Senators, House Representative and Presidents to a six year one term in office. After that they are out, out out.

This would get rid of all the careerists and ego driven people who are no longer responsive to their constituencies.

Also only allow lawyers to run for the Judiciary for one six year term as well .

 It is time to return government to the people.

by Bucky the Commoner (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 48 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 9:01:34 AM
 

Six years or combination to any elected office

If you Look at California, that passed term limits over a decade ago, politicians are going from one elected office to another.

Speaker of the house and ex governor take up mayorships -- then move to other elected offices. Politics is a career and these people have no other career.

Of course the excuse is that it takes time to get used to the house/senate/elected office rules.

I think there should be a higher minimum age to run for elected office. This will give people time to establish alternate careers and to show that they have competence in those careers. Their alterate career competence should be in the public record!

After that, a six year term limit is fine -- as long as it applies to having a career in elected politics. Also there should be a limit for how many times a person can run for office (whether elected to office or not!)

by Bleeding Heart Liberal (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 48 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 12:53:59 PM
 

great idea!

It's amazing how one simple idea has so much power.  God, how I agree with your one term limit.  That would solve SO many problems just logistically.

Bill

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (251 articles, 53 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 599 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 1:20:57 PM
 

Form or Join a local Ron Paul Meet-Up

Here is a politician extending a hand....not a finger.

Meet-ups are advancing support from "the web" to the streets!

Supporters form these meet-up groups...this is what's unbelievable...
I mean we can't even take the credit for it, because our office is
too small and we are growing so quickly!!!
----Ron Paul answers Q&A Phoenix Sky Harbor airport (June 15) 

http://ronpaul.meetup.com/

Who IS Ron Paul? They still need to know!!
NOBODY explains Ron Paul
BETTER than Ron Paul himself!

Here is an interactive audio archive of
Ron Paul speeches and interviews as a resource in chronological
order.

http://www.ronpaulaudio.com

by goldenequity (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 9:49:52 AM
 

Not perfect, but Far Far better

Term limits is a limited solution. If the corporations own the politicians and our government, they'll still control who's running and what benefits they receive after their single term.

No, the solution is to get corporate funding OUT of the whole political process. We have voting machine companies buying Secretaries of State, oil companies owning our executive branch, etc. It should be called what it is: CORRUPTION. That's what we'd call it if this happened in another country, right?

Campaign finance reform that would make it illegal to take money or gifts from anyone (foreign or domestic) except a person. Corporations should no longer be deemed "a person". Sure, you'll have a bunch of groups (PACS) putting up advertising, but corporate influence is much worse.

Read what Greg Pallast has to say about election rigging!

by Michael Gill (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Friday, June 22, 2007 at 1:06:23 PM
 

What to do with the finger

Better to limit them all not to one term but to one warning - "You act against the will of your electorate just once more, you creep, and you're out on your neck.  And you receive one more cent and we'll hang you."

THEN you would have representation and a rebirth of decency in the world. 

by amazin (34 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 400 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 9:56:37 AM
 

Implementataion

Better to limit them all not to one term but to one warning - "You act against the will of your electorate just once more, you creep, and you're out on your neck. And you receive one more cent and we'll hang you."

THEN you would have representation and a rebirth of decency in the world.

by amazin (8 articles, 244 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 9:56:37 AM

Good point - but how will you do that? People have dropped banners and occupied offices of senators etc and been escorted off the premises or arrested. They have everything covered - except thousands in the streets, which inevitably will lead to violence by the police or homeland security . People will be injured and even killed, but that might just wake up the rest as to what kind of system you live in. All over the world, in many languages, America is seen for what it is, but IN America the media is owned by the rich, so you get a constant stream of rubbish news about dead celebrity's babies fathers and celebrity prison time for drunk driving. when you are fed a diet of pap, you end up as pap-eaters, spineless, alseep, craving the next fix of the tube's big brother showtime crap. I don't mean to be cruel but you have got yourselves into a fix and the rest of the world is largely paying for it, so sort yourselves out before the world takes action against you. Putin's remarks are echoed round the world - he is just the first one to get any publiity about it - but wait, your media didn't even report it did they. shame on you all. Look for Putin's 90 minute interview with the world's media, including yours, you wont find it on USA wahsington post etc even though they were there. Why?

by ibrahim turner (25 articles, 32 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 178 comments) on Monday, June 18, 2007 at 4:06:49 PM
 

"Towards" Hope

It is true that the Democratic party has become the weak sister of the Republicans, and that money runs everything.

Our only hope?  To take over local politics and work up from there, installing hand counted paper ballots.  Then, we can take back state politics and eventually national politics.  Then, we bust up the oligopolies like a new Teddy Roosevelt, install public financing of elections, and start investigating the crimes, from 911 to Iraq to the alleged pedophilia rings in high places.

But it starts on the local level.  If you can not get your neighbors involved enough, beyond going out to vote once every two years, then they don't deserve to govern themselves.  Unfortunately, we thinking folks who are not among the ruling class (or their McMansion line management class) are going to be ridden down just like those ignorant neighbors

by GitarChris (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 124 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 10:35:34 AM
 

I agree

Once upon a time I was in no sense an "activist".  I left that to the other guy, but gradually, gradually I realized if not me, who?  I wouldn't even attend demonstrations (too much hassle), but life caught up to me and I knew I had to start protecting my children and planet.  Hopefully, I am a representative sample of millions of grudgingly waking up Americans.  I take heart at these wonderful internet sites in which we have the opportunity to have passionate and educational "town hall meetings" with our equally passionate neighbors.  Knowledge is power and truth has a way of acting itself out.  I still love my horribly wounded country and I think (pray?) we can dramatically turn things around in 2008.  Gore/Obama would be nice!

Keep the faith, Bill

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (251 articles, 53 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 599 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 1:17:46 PM
 

Agreed!

These clowns are people who are in the game for what they can get from it.  Term limits would help greatly, by the time a newly elected congressman gets the graft thing down, he's out.  Fine with me, why support an institution composed with people who's goal is to rip the rest of us off.

by Roger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 393 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 1:31:25 PM
 

Ideas like "term limits" etc don't get anywhere near the

root of the problem. These ideas pretend that there is some very limited procedural matter which (through some unfortunate oversight) hasn't quite been attended to, & that if we merely fix that, everything will go back on track.

That view of our problem is completely false. The crisis today results from the very structure of US society, whose institutions (the courts, the media, both parties, Wall St, etc) are all corrupt to the core. It results also from the global position of US capitalism, which has seriously deteriorated & no longer leads the world in much besides except military strength.

As long as American citizens continue to think in terms of applying Band-aids to a structure whose very foundations are rotting, there can be no solution. A solution must begin with a correct & honest analysis of the problem, & an explicit statement of where we want to go.

Examples of superficial "Band-aids" are these: pretending that the main problem is some rule about term limits (since that implies that the rest of the system is "OK"). Arguing about which "candidate you support." Pretending that the problem can be viewed without confronting basic issues like corporate power, idiotic consumerism, the grotesquely excessive influence of the military-industrial complex, the corruption of the media, an open examination of what lobbyists really are & what they really do, and how both parties are really just organized fronts for the ruling financial oligarchy.

Anything short of that kind of serious & far-ranging discussion is just kidding yourself. The system is broken -- it needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. This can't be done inside the framework of the existing system, just by tweaking a rule here or there, or by "supporting" this or that candidate.

If Americans really want to save themselves from the onrushing disaster, the first step must be a decisive rejection of the existing political system, & in particular, the abandoning of all illusions in the Democratic Party. There must be widespread recognition that this party's real function is simply providing deceptions to keep the public tethered to the existing ruling structures.

by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1232 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 3:19:02 PM
 

both/and

I totally agree with magnitude of corruption -- hence the Democratic/Republican Party, but maybe, just maybe, this can be a both/and. Maybe we can keep tweaking the system in the direction of our Consitution (e.g., 2006 was not without SOME benefits) at the same time we gear down for hard ball. I also think the internet is the Achille's Heel of this totalitarian mind set. One wonders if the 3rd Reich would have flourished had the internet been in place. The lake of rage building up behind this neo Nazi damn will eventually (inevitably?) reach critcal mass and then anything's possible.

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (251 articles, 53 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 599 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 4:10:34 PM
 

Stop Bush

Hmmm.. are we over there because of oil?  I got this letter, and I'm still scratching my head.  I thought we were in Iraq and Afghanistan because of oil, then I get this letter:

Hi Dan;

I'm not sure where you come up with all of the extraneous references to
what I do or do not beleive. However, I am still trying to figure out
why Americans are fighting and dying in Iraq. Maybe you can tell me.
Thanks for writing.

What I wrote was:

Dear Mark McVay,

    You are right about 'Heart of darkness' (The Horror).  This is
the basis of Apocalpyse Now, where the colonel whispers "The horror of
it" at the end.
    If people don't like the war they can end it.  You believe we are
over there because of oil.  Do you or your readers worship and respect
celebrities who travel by private jet (so they or their bodyguards can
carry a piece)?
    Do you boast about your SUV?  Do you eat too much meat?  Do you
boast about the size of your home?  Do you brag about the size of your
appliances?
     Last of all, do you have more than two children?

You guys are right that the Democratic Party has caved in.  I was receiving letters like clockwork until January and recently began receiving them again. What I determine is that everyone was waiting for Nancy Pelosi et. al. to stop Bush..since January.  It hasn't happened yet, and we are still in Iraq.

 What can we do?  I did not own a car from December 1990 to July 2004 - I relied on a motorcycle and public transportation.  I drive less than 7,500 miles.  I eat less than six pounds of meat a year.  And I have made the hardest decision.  I have no children and plan on having one child and adoption.

 Al Gore committed the unpardonable sin of running against Ralph Nader instead of running with him. If you don't believe me, ask yourself if you would like Joe Lieberman as vice-president.

by Barker (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 120 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 4:57:03 PM
 

term limits

won't help. It keeps good people from becoming more expert at the job with experience, and is no deterrant to to those who ar epart of a political machine and otherwise incompetent -- and there is no practical limit to the number political flunkies who can be put up for election by the machines.

Nope -- no easy way to Democracy: the systemic problems have to be fixed, and the people have to be heavily involved and informed. The single most effective 'fix' would be to have real jounalists again, and honest media instead of a state/corporate propaganda system.

by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 5:02:34 PM
 

Too Easy

Bill Epler's criticism, in my opinion, is too easy.

Blame everyone and hold no one responsible.  Dems and GOP are all alike, so nothing can help.

Pshaw, just because there are a limited number of solutions and politicians are gaited to seek convergent policies doesn't mean there are no differences between the parties.

Look at Pelosi and look at Hastert.  Can anyone honestly say there is no difference?  The only thing the same about them is their frustration over the grid lock.

I have advocated for activism on these pages again and again.  I am taking the step and running for town council.  I won't be able to get the troops our of Iraq, but I will be able to push Energy Independent Caroline our town's municipally run wind energy program.  I won't be able to to get universal health care, but I will be able to act and get our town to protect the environment and the value of our homes.

Just because we can't do everything, doesn't mean we can't do anything.  If, like Robert Chapman, you are disgusted with the politicians, go after them, change them, take responsibility and take action.

Robert Chapman

by Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 556 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 5:42:50 PM
 

Robt Chapman - please don't pretend that anyone really

claims both parties are "the same." That version of the claim is deliberately oversimplified, which makes it easier to knock down.

The actual claim is that both parties represent the same social interests & defend the same social hierarchy. Each however has its own style, its own rhetoric, and its own electoral base. That makes their behavior seem superficially different.

To take your example -- Hastert & Pelosi are "different" in the sense that Hastert overtly supports US militarism, and Pelosi supports it while pretending to oppose it. In terms of their stagecraft & the style of their lying, the two are certainly quite different. But both are rock-solid  friends of the military-industrial complex.

More broadly, Republicans support US imperialism, with a nice dose of gay-bashing thrown in. But Democrats support US imperialism, with perhaps a tiny raise in the minimum wage thrown in. This is a "difference." It's just not a particularly big or meaningful difference.

Another undeniable difference between the parties is the R's believe in impeaching an elected president just for having consensual sex outside of marriage. Democrats, on the other hand, don't believe in impeachment even if the president is a war criminal who holds himself above the law and has serially violated the Constitution. // Similarly, Republicans are not afraid to steal elections in broad daylight. Democrats, meanwhile, won't even put up a serious fight when elections are stolen from them.

by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1232 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 7:18:47 PM
 

good clarification

Having said my say, I suppose I should shut up, but I want to thank you for your relevant clarification.  For me the dems and pugs are now Tweedle Dee and Tweedlee dumber.  And yes, there's a few heroic exceptions, but exceptions proove the rule.  And this isn't rhetoric or jive.  There's too much at stake for that.  If we don't see very, very clearly that BOTH the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are lap dogs of America's Dictatorship of the Rich, we will not seek out apolitical alternatives to this political vicious circle.  When the deck is stacked, it's time to kick over the card table.

Perhaps we should add that this problem is at its worse on the national level, but that's another story.

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (251 articles, 53 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 599 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 7:46:43 PM
 

Godspeed

I'd vote for you, Robert.  Earlier I talked about and/or, i.e., reform the system (to the degree that's realistically possible) and non Democratic/Republican Party alternatives.  Sometimes, the only game in town is to kick over the card table and take your money back. 

But, these are vast questions to which I certainly have no conclusive answers and I applaud what you're doing.  Godspeed.

 Bill 

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (251 articles, 53 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 599 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 6:38:32 PM
 

I agree 100%

As you know I’m part of the hated right. (On this site) but I agree 100% with Mr. Epler, the politicians are giving us the entire finger.  You vote in a Democrat majority to stop the war and what do they do, support the war.  I vote in Republicans to seal the border and what do they do, lie to me and have secrete meetings to figure out how to shut me up.  My own president calls me, his base, a bigot and insinuates that if I don’t agree with him on the immigration bill I’m stupid.  I’m so mad at Bush right now I’ve doubled my coffee intake just to get thou the day.  I would love to know who the real puppet master is that makes the real decisions, because apparently it isn’t me and you!  Anyway great article!    

by David C Beach (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 169 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 10:49:05 PM
 

let's all hope the party's over

Thank you for putting into words what I didn't have to good sense to acknowledge myself, which is we're ALL getting fucked (excuse my french?).  We all of us have values, conservative (many of which I greatly respect) and liberal but NONE of have any representation.  It's such a joke.  Both of the parties are doing just that, having a party, and don't give a rats ass about their consituents.  Dear God, how did we come to this? 

Well, it took awhile but eventually the world acknowledged the "party's over" in the Soviet Union.  Isn't it time for us to do the same? 

by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (251 articles, 53 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 599 comments) on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 11:06:09 PM
 

One vote, one choice is silly in today's world

Representative democracy, i.e. "Liberal Democracy," is not particularyly democratic. It is far from the Athenian system that it claims to be based on. The Athenians insisted that ALL citizens be allowed to vote on pending legislation. Whoever was free on the weekend could go to the assembly and vote on the laws of the day. These laws were proposed by the Council of 500, for which seats were chosen by drawing lots because a public vote to choose a representative was thought to be too open to corruption. So, our system today actually contradicts Athenian thinking directly. The Athenian system only last 140 years, but it was probably the most successful period of gevernance ever seen.

So why do most people continue to think that our voting system is somehow a natural pinnacle of democratic evolution? Despite chads and stolen elections, the masses never stop to wonder why the Olympic (Games) voting system is more complicated than the presidential one. We have voting machines, so why don't we use them to actually determine the best leader?

There certainly are fully functional alternatives.  

 Take a look at Instant Runnoff Voting. Under IRV, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If a candidate receives a majority of first choices, he or she is elected. If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate with the fewest first choices is eliminated. Voters who ranked the eliminated candidate first now have their ballots counted for their second choice. This process continues until one candidate earns a majority.

The IRV system has worked well wherever implemented.

Also, consider Range Voting. We’ve all seen Range voting in action as the Olympic scoring system. Applied in an election, voters would score any or all candidates, with the highest average score winning the election. This eliminates the “spoiler,” “wasted vote,” and “candidate cloning” problems of our current system.

by Peter Dearman (9 articles, 27 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 130 comments) on Monday, June 18, 2007 at 12:39:59 AM
 

secret message

Many posters are calling for ACTION, and I agree.

That’s what I’m doing right now. You too. We’re taking action, speaking our minds and trying to influence and change each other’s mindsets. Sure, we’re preaching to the choir, but don’t thoughts swirl through thin air, and eventually “infect” nearly everyone. When these thoughts written down are passed from mind to mind, they become a message. Sometimes they’re skinny thoughts which often move swiftly. BulkingUP takes a little longer.

This is a Secret Message indirectly to the Sponsors.

We gotta sheep-dip corporate parasites off the body polotik. Vandalism is such a harsh word for peaceful resistance. Any little thing you can do to hurt corporations, would help.

Our present government protects corporations, so let’s bypass the middlemen and attack the Sponsors. These guys are sharp, it won’t take them long to figure out we’re pissed, and can hurt them.

End of secret message.

.

by rabblerowzer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments) on Monday, June 18, 2007 at 2:58:59 AM