Term Limits to Eliminate Lifetime Politicians

by | Nov 12, 2009 | Headline News | 7 comments

Do you LOVE America?

    Share

    Senator Jim Demint (R-SC) says he’ll be introducing a new Constitutional amendment that aims to impose term limits on US senators and representatives.

    Why We Need Term Limits in Congress:

    One of the more unfortunate things I’ve come to realize is that Congress has the power to corrupt even those with the most honorable intentions. Too often, I‘ve seen good, honest citizen legislators come to Washington only to realize that in Congress, you either conform to the system or find yourself on the outside looking in. As a result, the American people are left with more “career politicians” who go along to get along in Congress, and end up beholden to special interests, lobbyists, and big government policies.

    Though there is no simple solution to this trend, there is a clear place to start: term limits. With term limits, we can put an end to the “if you can’t beat them, join them” approach to legislating, and begin enacting responsible legislation that is in the best interest of our nation. As a result, I will soon be introducing a constitutional amendment limiting current and future members of Congress to serving three terms (six years) in the House and two terms (12 years) in the Senate.

    Let’s face it, Washington has become far more powerful than any one person or party. If we want to change the policies, we must first change the process. By imposing term limits, we can ensure frequent turnover which allows for new ideas and fresh perspectives in Congress. Additionally, term limits will keep politicians in-tune with their constituents and less focused on pleasing those who promise to help get them re-elected.

    While some Libertarians may disagree with this, here at SHTFplan.com, we think it may be a very powerful tool in curbing government corruption. 99% (or more?!) of Congress has been bought and paid for by special interests. With term limits, we can at least put some power back to the people and reboot the legislative branch every few years.

    To ratify a new amendment to the consitution, we would need two-thirds of the House and Senate to approve, and the states to sign. Let’s be honest, this is about as likely to occur as Ben Bernanke landing his money printing helicopter, so we may have to take the alternate route, which would be for State legislators to call a Constitutional Convention. I suspect, however, that the State legislators may also have a problem with this, because if Federal term limits are imposed, it would eventually filter down to the state level, and this would mean that thousands of unskilled politicians would be unemployed.

    Inquiring minds want to know if these unemployed legislators would be added to official Bureau of Labor and Statistics unemployment numbers and allowed to collect unemployment benefits. Of course, we are in a recession depression, and by opposing something like this Congress and the Obama administration can claim that they are actually saving hundreds of jobs.

    Read Senator Demint’s Letter Here…

    How to Amend the Constitution…

    URGENT ON GOLD… as in URGENT

    It Took 22 Years to Get to This Point

    Gold has been the right asset with which to save your funds in this millennium that began 23 years ago.

    Free Exclusive Report
    The inevitable Breakout – The two w’s

      Related Articles

      Comments

      Join the conversation!

      It’s 100% free and your personal information will never be sold or shared online.

      7 Comments

      1. Schaef

        I love the idea, but I agree it will probably never happen.  Its unfortunate that this problem was not foreseen by our founding fathers. Then we wouldn’t be in this conundrum of needing Congress to vote yes on something that clearly ISN’T in their best interest (but is still in the interest of the people)

      2. admin

        Yes, I have often discussed the same thing with friends and family. How could Jefferson have missed this one!?!?!  

        I have not read all his papers yet, so perhaps he did want limits but others didn’t. According to the book/movie John Adams, Jefferson was not happy with everything that was in / left out of the constitution.

        Somebody screwed the pooch on this one.

      3. Rick Blaine

        Agreed…on both counts.

        It’s probably a good idea…and yeah, this should probably be counted as a Constitutional goof.

      4. Rick Blaine

        Oh…and it will never happen.

      5. Bob-Bob-Bob

        Yeah , I agree with everyone here … its got a snowball’s chanch of making it thru….But still its worth a shot ! Wouldent it be wild if it passed !   Who knows , the power of prayer could help it pass

      6. Bill Walker

        The fact is the states have already applied for term limits of judges and members of Congress and applied for a convention in such numbers as to mandate a call. All 50 states have submitted 750 applications for an Article V Convention. Many of the applications deal with term limits. The applications can be read at http://www.foavc.org and are photographic copies of official government record.

        So, the conclusion that the states have an issue with it or that it is as likely to happen as a money printing helicopter, has been proven to be false. In fact, given the current situation of this nation, it is highly likely.

      7. admin

        Bill, thank you for the excellent and informative comment regarding Article V.

        I stand corrected, and you have convinced me that there is hope, as the states seem to be making an effort here.

        Mac

      Commenting Policy:

      Some comments on this web site are automatically moderated through our Spam protection systems. Please be patient if your comment isn’t immediately available. We’re not trying to censor you, the system just wants to make sure you’re not a robot posting random spam.

      This website thrives because of its community. While we support lively debates and understand that people get excited, frustrated or angry at times, we ask that the conversation remain civil. Racism, to include any religious affiliation, will not be tolerated on this site, including the disparagement of people in the comments section.