ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Here is the Problem With Term Limits by Merwin

Updated on February 19, 2012

TERM LIMITS... The Good Guys vs. The Bad Guys.

This is going to be a short one, but, I am hoping it generates a lot of comments.

It is my opinion that there is not one office in the land that should have limitations on how many times an incumbent can get re-elected. The rationale behind my opinion is simple, which is also the reason this can be a short Hub.

The concept is this... if a official has been elected and was much less in character than what his campaign suggested, let him be voted out!

On the other hand if a candidate gets into office and his constituency approves of his behavior and wishes to re-elect him repeatedly, this should not be prevented. Our right to re-elect whomever we wish should never be stifled or discouraged.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Old Poolman 6 years ago

      CoauthorU - Agreed, and Ron Paul is definitely one of a kind. Like I said above, I have very mixed feelings on term limits. Most of them I would help them pack their bags, but a few are really trying to do their job. There are just so many rotten apples in this barrel that even some of the good guys even get corrupt after a long exposure.

      I guess we are stuck with the voters imposing term limits at each election, and that sure doesn't give me a real warm fuzzy feeling when looking at the track record.

    • CoauthorU profile image

      CoauthorU 6 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA

      2 Davesworld & Old Poolman...

      Thanks for stopping by and leaving comments.

      I think the thing that concerns me the most is the restriction of my rights.

      If I have someone who is a cut above the crowd of corrupt legislators. One who has the running record of say a Ron Paul, one who has never voted for a pay raises for an elected official. One who every year gives back a lot of his yearly pay, one who refused to take his pension when he was eligible for it. One who has never taken a junket, one who has never voted to raise taxes. ETC. ETC ETC. For twelve terms of office.

      This is a man I should want to clone and vote him and his clones in over and over, again and again.


      Because this type of service is rare and we need as much of it as we can get. And I do not want some arbitrary line in the sand drawn, that forces me to throw the baby out with the bath water.

    • profile image

      Old Poolman 6 years ago

      Interesting to say the least, and I finish reading with mixed feelings. Take for example Charlie Rangel, went before the ethics committee, was found guilty, and had to stand before his fellow crooks and openly admit he was also a crook. Wow, what a punishment. And then the voters re-elected him for yet another term. He alone would justify term limits.

      On the other side of the coin, experience does matter. We had what we called "fast trackers" where I worked. They were moving to the top of the heap rapidly with all their brilliant career moves. They made some very poor decisions that made them look good, knowing they would not be in that position when the stuff hit the fan due to their own decision.

      If voters would educate themselves and quit voting just by the "D" or "R" in front of a candidates name, we would not need term limits. The bad one's of the bunch would be eliminated by the voters at the polls. Sadly this doesn't happen.

    • Davesworld profile image

      Davesworld 6 years ago from Cottage Grove, MN 55016

      Unfortunately, I think term limits are a bad idea whose time has come. As you yourself have said, there are more corrupt politicians than good ones, and sadly the bad ones seem to be able to lie, cheat, steal and buy their way back into office again and again and again. The good ones get disgusted and leave.

      The whole thing is moot anyhow. Don't expect the career politician to term limit him(or her)self out of the cushy job where they get power and the ability to play with gigantic sums of money for free.

    • CoauthorU profile image

      CoauthorU 6 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA

      2 Gemini Fox...

      Very interesting perspectives, thanks for stopping by.

    • Gemini Fox profile image

      Gemini Fox 6 years ago

      On the one hand, it would be a great idea. I believe that a poll was taken and it showed that Clinton would have been elected again if it had been possible - and then just think, we might have a national surplus instead of a national debt!

      On the other hand, with Congress as corrupt as it is and both parties being "sponsored" by corporations and the rich, you could end up with a dictator.

    • CoauthorU profile image

      CoauthorU 6 years ago from Inland Northwest, USA

      2 Sooner28...

      Thank you for stopping by and for leaving your thoughts, I appreciate it.

      2 dzephaniah...

      I thank you as well for your contribution.

      Corrupt politicians are a dime a dozen there are more of them by far than the good ones so when we find a good one why not keep him or her as long as we can..?

      Not to mention overall... should we not have the right to choose? As many times as we like... why limit our rights?

      Again, thank you for your opinions.

    • profile image

      Jake 6 years ago

      I am pro term limit. Too many Kennedys. It was informally established by George Washington, a man worthy of multiple terms; but who understood the dangers of such actions.

    • dzephaniah profile image

      David Zephaniah 6 years ago from Florida

      I disagree. Not having term limits will surely invite corruption. Every democratic countries have a term limit.

    • profile image

      Sooner28 6 years ago

      You also could add that once a politician gets experience, they have a better understanding of the informal rules of government, and are more likely to get things done.

      Interesting idea for sure. I'm currently undecided on the issue. The only thing I would be afraid of is the incumbent advantage of money and influence, whereas an outsider doesn't have that. And if a person gets elected for many years, they are much more difficult to beat, even if they need to go.