Tom Steyer pushing congressional term limits

[TheSocialDem]

I mean I know he’s a non factor As far as getting the nomination but pushing this in his campaign advertising like it’s the answer pisses me off. That’s a horrendous idea and he should know better

[oasis]

1. Steyer's going way out of his lane. He goes from "must impeach"

to "I can beat Trump at the ballot box", to "throw all the bums out".

[BootinUp]

12. He's got all the bases covered! Lol.

[DanieRains]

2. With Term Limits We Get No Nancy Pelosi Tom - Idiotic Idea - Just Get ALL THE MONEY OUT - DUH

Use your money to register voters, and destroy Republican hypocrites.

Do something good.

[Sloumeau]

3. Congressional term limits is one of the worst ideas ever.

Without term limits, you keep voting for the same people as long as they do a good job. If they start to stink, you don't vote for them anymore. With term limits, if your person is doing a great job, you are FORCED to get rid of them, no matter how much you like him or her. Who thought up this awful idea?

[Act_of_Reparation]

13. You could make the same argument about the presidency.

What is qualitatively different about Congress?

[Sloumeau]

16. I would make the exact same argument about the Presidency

Keep in mind that there were no term limits on the Presidency when the Constitution was written. No term limits gave us FDR for four glorious terms. Without Term limits, we probably would have had Bill Clinton for at least 1 more term, and may have had Obama for at least 1 more term. I think the 22nd Amendment was a poor idea, and it exists largely because Republicans were afraid that sooner or later there would be another FDR situation where Democrats would have the presidency for 4 terms. Without the 22nd Amendment, we might have had 3 terms of Reagan instead of 2 terms of Reagan and 1 term of GWB. There would have been little difference in the results.

[Sloumeau]

17. Correction, exchange "GHWB" for "GWB".

[Act_of_Reparation]

18. I take a more pessimistic approach.

It makes logical sense to say that, in a democratic system, the election itself is a check against shitty politicians and that term limits need not apply. In practice, it rarely works that way. Keeping the shitty politicians from office isn't what motivates most people to vote, and those who are concerned about such issues are easily blinded by their partisan affiliations.

The Constitution didn't provide for term limits, that's true. It also didn't allow direct election of senators or guarantee anyone the right to vote in federal elections. The logic of the founders being the passionate masses couldn't be trusted to make informed decisions, they greatly restricted who could participate in the electoral process.

Their fears weren't unfounded, as we've no doubt realized.

[BootinUp]

20. Bingo! This whole idea is of RW origins. Nt

[StarfishSaver]

26. The presidency is an executive position in which exponentially more power is centered in one person

Last edited Sat Dec 28, 2019, 03:35 AM - Edit history (1)

and agents who serve and operate at his/her pleasure. It's entirely different from Congress where power is spread out and consensus, compromise and collaboration are critical to getting anything done. Members of Congress and Senators are voted by groups of constituents and no one person has any extraordinary power without the consent of a larger body of representative agents.

Given this vast difference in roles, balances and concentration of power, it make sense for a president to be term limited. It makes no sense for Members of Congress to be.

[pnwmom]

32. +1000. n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

29. Not to mention that imposing term limits would require a constitutional amendment.

So it's really dishonest for Steyer to be advocating for it without explaining how it would have to be done.

[Mr.Bill]

4. To put it simply,

we already have term limits. They're called elections.

[RockRaven]

5. Term limits equates to "money buys votes"

in the modern era, at least. There are many examples of this "unintended" (or in Steyer's case, perhaps *intended*) consequence.

Term limit proponents claim they are limiting cronyism and money's influence on politics... but pay attention to places where term limits have actually taken effect and see the result as opposed to the claimed purpose. They do not match up.

Steyer pushing this policy in this particular historical moment means he is either a ridiculous dinosaur or a delusional moron or a self-interested corrupt asshole. You decide for yourself and vote as you will...

[Mike Nelson]

6. He's wrong...

... the limits we have - 2, 4, and 6 years - are fine. The limit on Presidential terms is wrong - we would have likely had a third Reagan term, but then Clinton; and Obama would still be President. What we need to do is make it easier to V*O*T*E! Let the people decide their leaders!

[JohnnyRingo]

7. Term limits imply there is an infinite...

... number of qualified candidates. One look at Louie Gohmert indicates otherwise.

Many would lose a great Representative with term limits and fewer would put their lives on hold to run knowing it's a short term job.

[TexasBushwhacker]

9. Louie Gohmert represents KKK territory

If he was thrown out because of term limits, his district would elect someone equally awful.

[diane in sf]

8. Not a good idea, then lobbyists are what would pass for institutional knowledge.

[FiveGoodMen]

22. Exactly!

[lostnfound]

10. No offense, TS, but how about billionaire term limits? LOL

How much better the world would be if the Kochs got to keep their billions only four years. Use it or lose it. They’d do much less damage to our political system.

[warmfeet]

11. He is pandering to the ignorant, just like repugs do every day.

Anyone who gives this idea more than 2 seconds of thought should be able to figure out that it is a really bad idea. And as others have previously stated, we already have term limits - they are called elections.

[Dem4Life1102]

14. Term limits are a long standing RW issue

Steyer is carrying water for conservatives on this one.

[oasis]

23. +1

[loyalsister]

24. Yep

Term limits in Missouri turned state government into a golden parachute to high paying lobbyist positions.

[RicROC]

15. term limits for judges

Judges, especially Supreme Court judges, are not elected by the people, so term limits should apply to them. I think no more than 18 years might be appropriate.

For Congressional seats I am still considering the idea of term limits since those seats are subject to periodic elections.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. Changing it would require a constitutional amendment. Good luck with that.

[RicROC]

34. don't all these term limit suggestions require a constitutional amendment?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

35. Yes, at the federal level.

[David__77]

19. I lean against this one.

I can see how such a measure appeals to some people, perhaps conveying the sense that getting new people in positions will "shake things up." That said, I think it's possible, particularly in the absence of big changes in how campaigns are financed, that term limits would not be so great.

[comradebillyboy]

21. Steyer's ads are just terrible. He ought to hire some actual

pros to help his campaign. The Tea Party ran on term limits and the Tea Party is no more. It's an issue without much traction.

[boomer_wv]

25. We don't need term limits

We have elections.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

27. He shouldn't be advertising for something that he can't accomplish.

Imposing term limits on members of Congress would require a Constitutional amendment, which he must know. It's dishonest. It's also a favorite talking point of the conservative Heritage Foundation.

[Jake Stern]

30. I whole heartedly support term limits on judicial appointments

They should term out after 30 years of cumulative service in the Federal judiciary or once they reach a mandatory retirement age of 75, whichever comes first.

There should be NO lifetime appointments.

For Reps and Senators, I'm not really on board for term limits as they are subject to elections.

[RockRaven]

31. Term limits ENTRENCH the influence of special interests and lobbyists,

because the lobbyists/special interest groups become the persistent-over-time big players in the system instead of individual politicians. Every couple of elections you'd get a new cohort of unknowns needing to bow and scrape in the direction of the established players just to get their candidacy off the ground.

I'm not at all surprised a billionaire who has turned his money towards politics is in favor of them.

Hell, the Koch brothers would like nothing better than term limits. That should tell Democrats something about how good of an idea Steyer has here.

[totodeinhere]

33. I'm getting sick and tired of his non-stop commercials. Of course he won't succeed in

buying the nomination but he sure is trying.