Term limits not only could benefit our country with new political officers brining in new ideas but it would also give women a better chance of becoming elected. With new members having to become elected after so many years this would give a women a higher chance of becoming elected then if there were not term limits. Term limits allow the same people to stay in office but with having to elect new people the group of people that would have to pick from to become elected would become smaller. “Due to term limits in many local and state offices, more women need to be ready to run when vacancies occur” (Rose 2016). While many people argue that women cannot do a man’s job term limits would allow that statement to wrong. Women have just as many …show more content…
“Term limits promote constant, positive governmental reform “by replacing professional politicians with citizen legislators who participate in local government out of a sense of civic duty” (Eastland, 2009). These citizen legislators or local people have a good grasp of what an everyday common person needs in their lives and would be a great fit as someone to help legislate the laws and rules that would help govern the lives of these people “Today legislators spend much more of their time serving as middlemen, making calls in behalf of their constituents to the many federal departments and agencies charged with administering the law” (Eastland, 1993). With that occurring in Congress the best idea to stop that would be term limits. With an official having to serve a number of terms then they would unable to be the middle man. Congress members who are only looking out for themselves would have to change that with term limits. No longer would they be able to take bribes from other members or be conspiring with each …show more content…
Sanders is an independent who has served in Congress and is looking to become president. In Johnathan Tasini book, The Essential Bernie Sanders and his vison for America, Tasini showcases what Sanders did in Congress and the positive things he had accomplished. “When he was in the House, Bernie voted in 1991 against the resolution authorizing US military action in the Persian Gulf War”. Not only has Sanders voted against war but he has introduced numerous climate change acts and has supported union workers and farmers. Sanders is a good example of a political leader who was elected and fought for the people. “When he was in the House, Bernie voted against the Economic Growth and Tax Relief of Reconciliation Act, which authorized the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2001. He also voted against the second round of Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2003” (Tasini 2015). With term limits, Sanders would complete his terms and try to run again. But what if Sanders was unsuccessful in winning over the people and their vote? Sanders would then have not accomplished all the things that he did while being in Congress. Sanders is just one example of what could have happened if we faced term limits. Not all the people who are in Congress are only caring about themselves. There are multiply Congressmen
It is not uncommon to find members of Congress who have genuine goals of spearheading, designing or even just supporting good public policy. It would be harsh to say that every member of Congress is against good policy. However what is difficult for members of Congress is deciding what is more important, the wishes of their constituents or national policy. Although it is rare, members of Congress vote against the popular opinion of his or her district in order to make what would be considered good policy in the national interest. This hinders their chance of re-election but is necessary for America. In very rare cases members of Congress have gone against the wishes of their constituents for moral reasons like in the aftermath of 9/11. When voting on the 2002 Iraq War Resolution, I am certain that the last thing of the minds of members of Congress was re-election. A very conservative House of Representatives member Jimmy Duncan said ‘‘when I pushed that button to vote against the war back in 2002, I thought I might be ending my political career.” In times of crisis members of Congress have decide between what is right, not what their constituents believe is right. Another goal other than re-election that members of Congress have is their own future. For many, being a members of The House of Representatives is a mere stepping stone in their career on the way to better things. Therefore for some members of Congress, re-election does not worry them and gives them the freedom to act in an environment striped of the constant pressure of re-election. However, considering that most of the members of The House Of Representatives goals lie within the Senate or high executive positions, re-election is still on their mind, all be it in the form of a different
Preventing federal judges to serve for life is a good concept, except when the judges become too old to continue presiding. Setting term limits for judges would be a great idea, because it would add diversity to the court systems every time a new judge arrives. Some judges are just too old, and senile, to still rule on cases and do their job effectively; therefore, setting term limits would ultimately benefit the courts because it would allow for diversity, and a new judge who may have different standards.
"Elections, especially of representatives and counselors, should be annual, there not being in the whole circle of the sciences a maxim more infallible than this, 'where annual elections end, there slavery begins.' These great men . . . should be [chosen] once a year — Like bubbles on the sea of matter bourn, they rise, they break, and to the sea return. This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey." —John Adams
The Honorable Jonathan Yates, former deputy general counsel for the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of the U. S. House of Representatives, writes, “This lifetime term now enjoyed by justices not only contravenes the spirit of the Constitution, it counters the role intended for the court as a minor player in the equal judiciary branch of government. Term limits are needed to adjust the part of the court to the intent of the founding fathers” (Np). Judge Yates explains that the greatest powers of the Supreme Court did not originate from the Constitution or Congress, but from their own rulings (Np). The most prominent of which, was being Marbury v. Madison, in which the court granted itself judicial review, or the power to determine the constitutionality of legislation (Yates). Furthermore, the intended role of the court by the founding fathers was so small, that it did not have a home, or meet to hear any cases (Yates). An amendment to the Constitution removing the lifetime tenure of U.S. Supreme Court judges needs consideration by Congress. Lifetime tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court has led to four points that could not have been foreseen by the creators of the Constitution. The first problem resulting from the Supreme Court’s tenure policy is that judges’ are holding on to their seats, disregarding debilitating health issues. The second issue that has arisen from lifetime tenure is the use of strategic retirement by sitting judges to ensure a like-minded replacement. The third development resulting from lifetime tenure is the steady decrease in case decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court. The fourth and final effect lifetime tenure has had on the Supreme Court is an increase in celebrity status of the judges, which has le...
The 22nd Amendment creates a lame duck and which stops abuse of power3. Presidents in their second term have been seen to usually suffer diminished power, particularly after the second midterm elections. This diminish of power creates a lame duck. The president becoming a lame duck, stops him from being able abuse of power. The 22nd Amendment also stops the country from being a monarchy. US. Senators and Congressmen don’t have term limits because their voices are balanced by opposing parties in their chambers, the presidency is different. The president has no similar
Term limits could increase the quality of the Supreme Court nominees. One of the driving factors behind a Supreme Court nominee is their age (Ringhand np). Individuals over 60 years of age are less likely to be appointed. This means presidents intentionally exclude a large number of highly qualified individuals from serving on our nation’s highest court (Ringhand np). Term limits resolve this problem. Furthermore, the threat of a justice’s cognitive decline may be reduced, since there would no longer be a temptation to hold out for a strategically timed retirement.
When the United States was founded, the theme behind the new government was to establish an efficient system without doling out too much power to any one person. The Founders intended to prevent a rebirth of tyranny, which they had just escaped by breaking away from England. However, when members of Congress such as Tom Foley, who served as a Representative from 1964 through 1995, and Jack Brooks, who served as a Representative from 1952 through 1994, remain in the legislative system for over forty years, it is evident that tyranny has not necessarily been eradicated from the United States (Vance, 1994, p. 429). Term limits are a necessity to uphold the Founders’ intentions, to prevent unfair advantages given to incumbents, and to allow a multitude of additional benefits.
Congressional terms have no limits. Controversy exists between those who think the terms should be limited and those who believe that terms should remain unlimited. The group that wants to limit the terms argues that the change will promote fresh ideas and reduce the possibility of decisions being made for self-interest. Those who oppose term limits believe that we would sacrifice both the stability and experience held by veteran politicians. They also point out that our election process allows the voter to limit terms, at their discretion. While experience and stability are important considerations, congressional terms should be limited to a maximum of two.
One important reason Americans want to limit terms of their elected representatives is because they are likely to blame what they observe as professional and almost permanent ruling elect of career politicians for a majority of the country’s ill. Supporters of term limits claim the advantages of incumbency are so overpowering that they instead decrease representative democracy and diminish the effectiveness of the government. “Since 1950, about 90% of all incumbents in the House have won the reelection. The 10% who do not return includes both retiring members and those defeated in reelection attempts.” (Term Limits) “Proponents term limits argue that elected officials in Washington eventually become estrang...
Though, it would be refreshing to elect an official who remained focused on the best interest of their constituent, the reality is, special interest groups hold the purse. We must set term limits to prevent corruption and give the new comer on the block a fighting
Getting a new judge would mean a lot of inexperience and because a judge with life tenure would know a lot more, there would be less mess ups and consequential decisions made by the Supreme Court. In conclusion, the topic of Supreme Court terms is an important issue today because many court decisions have taken place this year, like gay marriage, Obamacare and court rulings relating to clean air and the environment. My position on whether Supreme Court Justices Should Have Life Tenures is the best one because I personally believe that our current system that was put in place around the beginning of the Supreme Court should not be changed because the judges are getting “too old to make decisions”.
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system.
Upon first examination, the idea of implementing term limits in Congress is appealing. In fact, the idea of term limits was initially discussed by our founders, though it was eventually decided that it should not be included in the Constitution (Newton-Small, 2010). The reasons for considering term limits have remained consistent since the beginning of the country, however, and include ensuring legislative turnover, limiting the abuse of the power of seniority, and decreasing the advantages given to incumbents in the campaign process. Interestingly, the states that have adopted term limits have not seen the expected positive outcomes, nor have the opponents seen the dire results that had been predicted. Upon further investigation, the case for term limits is strong as long as it is a nationally based initiative in order to create uniformity and the limits are long enough to increase competence in the job and head off short-term thinking, however without increased voter involvement, no reform will solve the current concerns with Congress.
If you leave one person in congress for too long then they will never change their views and nothing new will ever get done. If there was a three of four term limit then people would work harder to get things done faster and pass bills that benefit the people because they know that they will only get reelected now because of that. With term limits in place, Congress will be more responsible toward their constituents because they will soon be constituents themselves. They...
About eight decades ago, the United States Constitution granted American women the right to vote. During the same era, only men ran for office and decided what is best for American citizens. Many females in the world today are becoming politicians. Today, many women will consider running for local offices in their communities. The “Women Rights” article states “women were excluded from the electoral process for more than 140 years”. The “Women Rights” article also states that women did not have the opportunity to attend college. Women in their communities are considering running for president, commissioner, secretary, etc. American citizens will decide who should hold office. The three reasons why I believe women should consider politics are