have seen many come and go, but for the most part. They are for them selves and not for the people.
john - 11 years ago
Just as important as Constitutional Term Limits are:
1- Repeal 17th Amendment
This will force Senators to work for their states instead of for PAC lobbyists
Repealing 17thA will return the voice of the State to DC and help reduce size of Fed Gov.
Repealing 17th Amendment would also reduce the expense of running for Senate, taking away the advantage of the incumbent and allowing more people to run as challengers.
2- Constitutional Amendment to provide for RECALL of Senators.
When we enacted the 17thA, we never modified MO Constitution to enable recall of Senators.
***
Both Missouri Senators, Blunt and McCaskill, said they are against term limits. They said 'let the voters decide when they don't want us anymore.
But that view is self preventing under our current system.
Due to the 17th amendment, Senators now run very expensive statewide campaigns. This means the PAC money for incumbents makes them virtually unbeatable.
The 17th Amendment is a HUGE source of today's Senate problems.
The wording is deceptively simple, and its consequences were far from simple.
Term limits, among other things, prevent a politician from making it a career, from building a power center, and from having undue influence over his office/chamber.
In contrast, excessively short terms can result in an instability that could cause the direction of the country to change too frequently. This would be detrimental to business, stock markets and other economic interests that need 'stability' for long term planning and outlook.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would actually be more helpful than Term Limits.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would make it much cheaper to run for Senate and would open the campaigns up to people who are not wealthy and don't have PACs backing them.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would encourage turn over in the Senate and would dramatically reduce PAC influence - almost overnight.
Thelma Taylor - 11 years ago
Not only do I support term limits, but we need to couple that movement with campaign finance reform. Only then can the office holders have the interests of their constituents as a priority instead of spending most of their time trying to keep their elected office by accepting huge sums from donors with huge agendas that causes them to lose sight of their real and intended mission.
have seen many come and go, but for the most part. They are for them selves and not for the people.
Just as important as Constitutional Term Limits are:
1- Repeal 17th Amendment
This will force Senators to work for their states instead of for PAC lobbyists
Repealing 17thA will return the voice of the State to DC and help reduce size of Fed Gov.
Repealing 17th Amendment would also reduce the expense of running for Senate, taking away the advantage of the incumbent and allowing more people to run as challengers.
2- Constitutional Amendment to provide for RECALL of Senators.
When we enacted the 17thA, we never modified MO Constitution to enable recall of Senators.
***
Both Missouri Senators, Blunt and McCaskill, said they are against term limits. They said 'let the voters decide when they don't want us anymore.
But that view is self preventing under our current system.
Due to the 17th amendment, Senators now run very expensive statewide campaigns. This means the PAC money for incumbents makes them virtually unbeatable.
The 17th Amendment is a HUGE source of today's Senate problems.
The wording is deceptively simple, and its consequences were far from simple.
Term limits, among other things, prevent a politician from making it a career, from building a power center, and from having undue influence over his office/chamber.
In contrast, excessively short terms can result in an instability that could cause the direction of the country to change too frequently. This would be detrimental to business, stock markets and other economic interests that need 'stability' for long term planning and outlook.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would actually be more helpful than Term Limits.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would make it much cheaper to run for Senate and would open the campaigns up to people who are not wealthy and don't have PACs backing them.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would encourage turn over in the Senate and would dramatically reduce PAC influence - almost overnight.
Not only do I support term limits, but we need to couple that movement with campaign finance reform. Only then can the office holders have the interests of their constituents as a priority instead of spending most of their time trying to keep their elected office by accepting huge sums from donors with huge agendas that causes them to lose sight of their real and intended mission.