Jeb wants term limits for Congress

[lucas80]

Interesting little comment from Jeb that I heard on Iowa Public Radio this morning. Jeb was at an annual Reagan themed love fest in Scott County last night and was touting his record as governor, and how governors like Terry Branstad know how to solve problems like water quality inside their borders. They don't need the Feds looking over their shoulders. He mentioned term limits in Congress as a way to return power to the states. He also mentioned a lobbying ban of six years in DC for all ex-Congressmembers. Which actually should be a ban for life, but six years is a start.
Which is really laughable on several levels. Iowa's water quality is horrible, and Terry Branstad isn't exactly someone you want to reference while talking about the benefits of term limits.

 

[Huey Grey]

Jeb's starting to become a second tier candidate. Comments like this only solidify how clueless he is.

 

[joelbc1]

I find this very interesting, That a "true conservative" like Jeb wants the Constitution changed. There are term limits every 2 years for Congress and every 6 years for Senators.

 

[Wahawk56]

He's right. America is simply running itself at this point. A Monkey could do congress/senator work.

 

[Titanhawk2]

I agree - 5 terms for House, 2 for Senate.

They're not suppose to be lifetime jobs, nor full-time. We need people with more experiences coming in than having 30 years experience on committees.

 

[22*43*51]

Terry Branstad isn't exactly someone you want to reference while talking about the benefits of term limits.

That's true. Terry does poke the idea of term limits in the eye.

He's been keeping Iowa from becoming Illinois for a quarter of a century.

 

[thewop]

While I'm in favor of term limits, there'd be no need for it if we Americans actually paid attention to races more frequently. it's too easy to think: 'Well, nothing all that bad has happened to me in the last few years, I'll just check his box again.'

 

[joelbc1]

I agree - 5 terms for House, 2 for Senate.

They're not suppose to be lifetime jobs, nor full-time. We need people with more experiences coming in than having 30 years experience on committees.

And "we the people" be damned!
If you want to change election results, don't limit candidate choices.....limit the friggin' $$$$. Incumbents enjoy HUGE advantages. You guys are attacking symptoms...the disease you suffer from has a vastly different cause!

 

[Vroom_C14]

While I'm in favor of term limits, there'd be no need for it if we Americans actually paid attention to races more frequently. it's too easy to think: 'Well, nothing all that bad has happened to me in the last few years, I'll just check his box again.'

Paying attention doesn't seem to work as those running lie through their teeth to get (re)elected and when in, do nearly nothing of what they promised.

I am all for term limits on all as suggested. If the POTUS (the highest seat in the world) is limited, so should the rest.

P.S. Those elected should NEVER be able to exempt themselves from the laws they create.

 

[22*43*51]

And "we the people" be damned!
If you want to change election results, don't limit candidate choices.....limit the friggin' $$$$. Incumbents enjoy HUGE advantages. You guys are attacking symptoms...the disease you suffer from has a vastly different cause!

I'm sure Kim Reynolds won't have any trouble becoming Governor next election and she's not an incumbent.

 

[theVoicefromtheTomb]

I think more importantly we should stop the practice of gerrymandering legislative districts.

 

[lucas80]

I think more importantly we should stop the practice of gerrymandering legislative districts.

I am in favor of this. It would lead to true competition in races, and would be a moderating effect to get rid of the extremes of both parties.

 

[joelbc1]

I am in favor of this. It would lead to true competition in races, and would be a moderating effect to get rid of the extremes of both parties.

Iowa does a much better job of maintaining its integrity than most every other state. It may not be flawless, but it is as bipartisan as it can be. Still in Iowa, the "party in power" every 10 years, does enjoy an advantage.

 

[aflachawk]

I find this very interesting, That a "true conservative" like Jeb wants the Constitution changed. There are term limits every 2 years for Congress and every 6 years for Senators.

Changing the constitution is not a bad thing, matter of fact the founders put a mechanism in there to do just that. Now ignoring the constitution and rule of law? That's a problem. As far as your attempt at a point about election being the same as term limits... Pretty weak point. I know you can do better.

 

[lucas80]

I agree - 5 terms for House, 2 for Senate.

They're not suppose to be lifetime jobs, nor full-time. We need people with more experiences coming in than having 30 years experience on committees.

I would allow for a total time in Congress. Something divisible by 6, either 18 or 24 total years in Congress. That allows for people to truly accomplish things, and allows for a natural progression from the House to the Senate which occurs quite often. And, I've posted many times the US should allow for one 6 year term for the President. Eliminate the re-election scramble and allow the President to focus on their job.

 

[joelbc1]

Changing the constitution is not a bad thing, matter of fact the founders put a mechanism in there to do just that. Now ignoring the constitution and rule of law? That's a problem. As far as your attempt at a point about election being the same as term limits... Pretty weak point. I know you can do better.

Then Jeb ought to campaign on the fact he supports a Constitutional Amendment Convention. He knows in his heart of hearts, that is a LONG shot at best and an even LONGER shot that anything happens in this regard. However, it is red meat for his base and makes a good sound byte.

 

[Huey Grey]

He's right. America is simply running itself at this point. A Monkey could do congress/senator work.

Yeah, no it couldn't.

 

[cigaretteman]

I am in favor of this. It would lead to true competition in races, and would be a moderating effect to get rid of the extremes of both parties.

Yep, the country would be much better off with more competitive districts. It would moderate those nominated and elected for both parties and encourage much more compromise and working across the aisle, leading to much better governance. In nearly every state that term limits have been tried the results have not been good as valuable legislative experience has been lost and institutional memory has been destroyed.

 

[LuteHawk]

Jeb Bush is about to learn something about term limits.
The American people had his father for 4 years as our
President and his brother for 8 years as President. Now
they are saying 12 years of a Bush in the Oval Office is
enough. There are limits to one family presuming that
the Presidency is theirs whenever they want it.

Bottom Line: Jeb Bush will be the victim of term limits
for the U.S. Presidency. He will never win the GOP
nomination.

 

[HawkMD]

Then Jeb ought to campaign on the fact he supports a Constitutional Amendment Convention. He knows in his heart of hearts, that is a LONG shot at best and an even LONGER shot that anything happens in this regard. However, it is red meat for his base and makes a good sound byte.

He might just be planning to issue an executive order.

 

[CeMar_Clone]

Interesting little comment from Jeb that I heard on Iowa Public Radio this morning. Jeb was at an annual Reagan themed love fest in Scott County last night and was touting his record as governor, and how governors like Terry Branstad know how to solve problems like water quality inside their borders. They don't need the Feds looking over their shoulders. He mentioned term limits in Congress as a way to return power to the states. He also mentioned a lobbying ban of six years in DC for all ex-Congressmembers. Which actually should be a ban for life, but six years is a start.
Which is really laughable on several levels. Iowa's water quality is horrible, and Terry Branstad isn't exactly someone you want to reference while talking about the benefits of term limits.

What would you expect from a RINO. Not a conservative bone in his body.

 

[joelbc1]

He might just be planning to issue an executive order.

That's a stretch to make an inane point, isn't it, Doc? You upset with how Terry B. writes his own rules?

 

[pablow]

That's a stretch to make an inane point, isn't it, Doc? You upset with how Terry B. writes his own rules?

Not anywhere close to "inane." Many EOs are illegal and many more seriously distort constitutional checks and balances.

 

[joelbc1]

Not anywhere close to "inane." Many EOs are illegal and many more seriously distort constitutional checks and balances.

"illegal"...by your definition? Interesting pablow.
"inane" is a much better and more correct word to use here. Thanks for your help, though.

 

[aflachawk]

Then Jeb ought to campaign on the fact he supports a Constitutional Amendment Convention. He knows in his heart of hearts, that is a LONG shot at best and an even LONGER shot that anything happens in this regard. However, it is red meat for his base and makes a good sound byte.

So you're admitting your OP was wrong? Good that's called progress. BTW, a constitutional convention is not the preferred way to change the constitution. I believe what Jeb is referring to is probably a constitutional amendment. I assume you know that? If not, I am glad to enlighten you.(Again)

 

[joelbc1]

So you're admitting your OP was wrong? Good that's called progress. BTW, a constitutional convention is not the preferred way to change the constitution. I believe what Jeb is referring to is probably a constitutional amendment. I assume you know that? If not, I am glad to enlighten you.(Again)

Then he ought to propose his constitutional amendment. He understands how the system works. He doesn't have to act "the idiot" to appeal to his base, does he?
My suggestion is a whole lot easier...and much more efficient. Rewrite the laws ruling campaign fund-raising and the immoral affect of corporate and PAC donations. The SC got it dead-assed wrong. That ruling needs to be reheard and corrected.

 

[pablow]

"illegal"...by your definition? Interesting pablow.
"inane" is a much better and more correct word to use here. Thanks for your help, though.

EOs are legal if they facilitate enforcement of laws passed by Congress; EOs are illegal if then negate duly enacted federal laws. It's not that difficult a concept for a person that doesn't have his nose up Obama's ass.

 

[CuttyDoesIt]

Iowans will hate this.