![]() ![]() Twelve years is a nice round number, and, for those who want action rather than an issue, the one most likely to succeed. But my old eighteen year model won’t work, either. ![]() Short terms look extreme, probably because they are extreme. Purists like short term limits, but versions under twelve years are asking for trouble. Term limits still polls well, and old friends, like myself, remain steadfast in their support of the concept.įirst, we ought to define the concept. Support, and certainly intensity, may be on the wane now, but the issue is still lively. I suspect that support peaked sometime in 1994 when the public became very impatient with what it saw under the Capitol dome. In the 90’s, the issue picked up some smarter proponents state referenda were passed the idea began to attract the support of a strong majority of Americans. Obviously, term limits was not the stuff of legislative dreams in those days.īut, the worm turned. Sometime in that period I testified before a crowd of two at a desultory hearing in the Senate. I introduced it each biennium thereafter, always seeking co-sponsorship from my colleagues. ![]() Any term limits proposal sounded fierce in those days, but, in fact, mine was a sissified eighteen year version. I introduced my first term limits Constitutional Amendment soon after I was sworn in, in January of 1971. First, however, I must make the usual disclaimer that the views presented here are my own, not those of the Brookings Institution. We need to be talking about important issues, like the functionality of our government.Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this distinguished Subcommittee in support of Congressional term limits, an attractive butterfly I have chased unsuccessfully for many years. Please leave your thoughts below– I am about reasoned conversation and open discussion. Today, members of Congress may remain in Congress as long as they continue to get elected. It’s not about a particular political party- it’s about leaders inability to use reason and compromise in order to make a more functional government.īy 1951 the 22nd Amendment was passed and instituting term limits on the presidency. This is what I see as a major contributing factor to the growing dysfunction in our government. As you can see in 1982, 58 member of the Senate had overlapping ideological views and as the years progressed fewer and fewer members had overlapping ideological views. The following is only a “correlation” not a causation, I am aware– but it is still interesting. Isn’t it time to remember our government isn’t made up of one person– but many people. Yet, the general public seems to let Congress members get by with very little attention and scathing- allowing all their hatred and dissatisfaction rain down on a single person. Healthy debate that leads to compromises which are good for the people seems to be a thing of the past for most members of Congress. Congress could work together to figure out a budget that actually means not raising the debt ceiling, for example. Congress could also put their foot down today- but it appears that Congress isn’t actually functioning anymore. Congress could have put their strength and might against going into war after war, which continues to drain our finances. Yet, here we are bashing on and picking on the leaders of our country – (who the people did vote for) – forgetting, it seems that they don’t actually work alone. Since memes weren’t as big when Bush (2001-2009) was in office, I found it a little harder to find a good example– Memes seem to be making it so easy for people to spew hatred. Lately, I’ve seen a lot of things like this popping up in my social media. Has anyone else noticed how people love “a” scapegoat. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |