Should limits exist on the number of terms elected officials may serve?

Topic:
Policy Debates

31 Contributors
in this discussion.

Yes
87% of users

  • I believe there should be a limit on the number of terms an individual can serve in any political office so that the government could consist of public servants rather than career politicians.

    Our current system, which allows most political offices to be held for an unlimited number of terms provided the individual receives adequate votes, allows for career politicians whose only goal is to serve their own interests. If we placed a limit on terms, it would allow a proper rotation of citizens serving in office as true representatives of the people and reduce the ease of lobbyists to buy favors from politicians.

    Yes FairMckinley99

  • Elected officials should have limited numbers of terms because new ideas are a part of democracy.

    Term limits for elected officials are a very good idea, because democracy works best when new people and ideas are brought to the table. When someone stays in office for decades at a time, there is no chance for younger people to get involved in politics. The voice of younger people is important, as they have the most to lose from a system of government in the long term.

    Yes babyuniqh

  • Joseph Huffman

    Political office should never become a lifetime profession.Go there do your turn and leave.

    Yes Anonymous

  • I believe elected officials should be limited in their time in office, because we always need fresh faces and ideas in government.

    Fresh ideas come from fresh young minds. If elected officials were allowed to serve continually, then our government would be stagnant with archaic policies and no real reform. It is a great thing that elected officials can not serve copious amounts of time in the office to which they are elected.

    Yes AboardTod

  • Limits need to be imposed to avoid corruption.

    Washington is full of these well-connected, self-serving politicians who do nothing for the people, or for the little guy. If these elected officials are not limited to the number of terms they serve, then there is no limit to how much influence they gain and, considering they are not acting in the best interest of the average citizen, it's just not helping the country.

    Yes MarsBIue

  • I am for term limits on elected officials, because it is important for fresh faces to get a higher chance to take office.

    Most incumbents have a higher chance of winning an election, compared to newcomers. Having term limits ensures that newcomers have a good chance of getting into political office and that no one has a monopoly on a district. It also ensures that no one elected official can have too much power, because they are only in office for a relatively short time.

    Yes TMacias

  • Yes, otherwise they really do not represent "We the people"

    Term limits are always brought up. What I want to do is find out how all Americans can vote for or against this issue. If politicians knew that there were to be term limits, that they would have the same benefits, pensions, social security, etc., as the masses, perhaps they would truly REPRESENT us the way the original constitution was formed.. When I had the opportunity many years ago as a campaign chairman for a US congressman to ask, how many politicians are ON THE TAKE?" He responded, "98%". That was in the mid 1960s. Now, I am fairly certain it is 100%, because when you think about what their pay grade is, take a look at what they drive, how they live, where they eat,....where does that money come from? My belief is in what I was told way back in the 60s, the longer they serve the better relationships they form with lobbyists and fillibusters and other heavyweights. Therefore this all adds to their political might which in turn adds to their personal coffers. I am an American, proud of it. I do not want to learn a new language in my lifetime, nor do I want to leave this kind of legacy for my children and grandchildren. What does it take to get this started legally? Let "We the people" decide how we want to be represented and let our politicians wake up to the fact that they are there to represent us. YOU think about this and come up with your own thought about whether I am right or wrong and the path this nation is taking.

    Yes Anonymous

  • Term limits ensure politicians are not "career politicians" whose entire purpose is to get re-elected.

    There have been several senators and congressmen that have given themselves self imposed term limits. These politicians ended up doing many important things. Since they were not worried about re election, they were able to focus on important legislation.

    Yes egobeluosus

  • Long terms are often marked by decay in the later years and can make it harder to transition.

    Comfort breeds inertia. A good politician may be well loved, but when the position is held for too long it can atrophy development and lead to an environment more like a monarchy. This defeats the concept of an election. Furthermore, following extremely long terms the changes brought by new officials can be destructive.

    Yes NikiM5n

  • It was devised long ago that limits should exist on elected official terms as it is more fair to everyone and no one could have a monopoly.

    As we see with the US presidential elections each president places their own unique perspective and influence into their presidency, which in turn dramatically affects the country as a whole (not to mention the world). Since there are two parties that exist in US Politics it is a ying and yang dynamic that helps keep things in balance overall. If a Republican President could remain in office 20 years or more, the affect that would have would be very skewed and one sided, as would a Democratic President. Elected officials also are much more motivated to make a difference knowing that there is a deadline to their term and they want to do the most they can in that period.

    Yes Ramon Griffith

  • Yes, limits should exist on the number of terms elected officials should serve because we don't need career politicians that don't understand the problems facing "real people".

    Yes, there should be limits on the number of terms elected officials may serve because we don't want or need career politicians who don't understand the problems facing real people. It would also help reduce the influence of special interest groups because fresh faces will not be as easy to convince to vote a certain way. Politicians in Washington have no idea what problems people face in the real world, and get used to their perks and elitist lifestyles paid for by the American taxpayer.

    Yes MycCra2ii

  • Yes a limit should exist on the number of terms elected officials may serve since everyone deserves a fair chance.

    Yes a limit should exist on the number of terms elected officials may serve since a fair chance should be given to all. Additionally if an official is qualified and deserving, they will get other opportunities within the constituency to serve the citizens. We need to respect the constitution and the provisions set by them as a fair amount of thinking has gone into it.

    Yes WittyRud

  • If there is no limit, they may abuse their power or privileges.

    Officials are elected based on merit and they serve a specified length and duration of their terms. If there is no limit, they might have lost their popularity and credibility and yet, continue serving the public who cannot vote them out. This would result in dissatisfaction and maybe public protests which would affect the peace.

    Yes 5h4m4m3Edga

  • I think that imposed limits are the only fair and reasonable way to go.

    Limits should exist not only to give other people a chance but change is needed. If someone in office is doing a great job then they can serve as long as possible. There is no way I would be okay with having the same president my whole life. It's not fair to the people or fair to other politicians to let someone serve indefinitely.

    Yes DennBe

  • Term limits for politicians should be limited in order to prevent them from becoming too powerful.

    It is a known fact that power corrupts so term limits should exist for any elected official. When in office, politicians often hold a lot of power that effects the daily lives of their constituents and to prevent the misuse of power, their length of time holding office should be limited. If a politician feels that they will hold the job indefinitely, he is more likely to use that position to gain benefits and favors for himself.

    Yes Nik0Interior

  • I believe that there should be term limits on elected officials because it is good to have different ideas from different people.

    I believe that it is a good idea to have term limits for elected officials. Having limits will ensure that new ideas are brought forth. It would also keep a few individuals with years of seniority from having so much influence over what happens. I believe our representation would be more equal with term limits. When some individuals stay in office too long, I think that they tend to forget that they are there to represent their constituents and not their own individual interests.

    Yes R0d0Ferdy

  • I do think there should be a cap on the amount of time a person can serve in office, if we let people serve out long terms then we get no forward progression.

    I definitely believe that short terms should be held by government officials. When someone stays in a term for a long time there really is no progress to be had. A person becomes comfortable and stuck in their ways. Ever so often new ideas need to be formed and implemented, also new energy needs to be felt in a city. When someone is first elected to office they usually have fresh plans for their communities. If an elected official isn't pulling his or her weight a limited term would at least ensure that you are not stuck with them forever.

    Yes C0ImEIite

  • We need term limits on our elected officials

    The recent death of Ted Kennedy, who served for decades, was a good reminder that we need to enact term limits on our elected officials. If the Presidency is only limited to 2 terms--8 years--then how is justified that Senators can serve so long it literally becomes a lifelong commitment? We need to keep new ideas and new blood in Congress and the Senate--and one of the best ways to do this is enact and enforce term limits.

    Yes ElwBoardin

  • There should be a limit of the number of terms elected officials may serve to ensure their mind is on their job and not on reelection.

    By not limiting the number of terms an elected official may serve, we are creating career politicians. These individuals become more focused on how they need to vote in order to get reelected as opposed to voting what is best for the state or the country. They also end up concentrating more on how their vote or position will effect the special interest groups or lobbyists supporting them.

    Yes 5h4n3Got

  • I support term limits for elected officials.

    I think there should be definite term limits for elected officials. Public service was never supposed to be a career for people, but a rather temporary job. I think that the longer those serving stay, the more apt they are to get involved in corruption and forget why they are really there in the first place. They worry not about doing the peoples work, but about getting themselves re-elected.

    Yes EIenM4fi4

  • I support term limits for elected officials, allow the people to be represented by the people.

    Turn on the television news for just an hour and it will be clear that our representatives are having a hard time remembering to represent us. Could that be due to the fact that they are not of us? Our career politicians are not here in the trenches with us, they do not know what it is to get laid off, to choose between food and medicine. Term limits will increase turn over in seats long held by the privileged, increasing the chance that our fellows may be able to have the true privilege of serving We The People with the experiences of the people.

    Yes R34IChas

  • Term limits should limit the number of terms elected officials may serve now that the Supreme Court has ruled that the previous limits on political contributions are unconstitutional.

    Now that the Supreme Court has decided that limits on political contributions is an unconstitutional limit of free speech we will need some method to change who the corporations put into office. Term limits may be the only way we will see any change in our elected officials now that these positions have been put up for sale by our highest Court.

    Yes 5kyErto

  • Term limits should exist for elected officials to keep government progressive.

    Term limits should exist for elected officials for the benefit of maintaining a government that is progressive in thought. With an influx of newly elected officials comes the opportunity for new ideas that will provide answers to long-standing dilemmas. Term limits would also reduce the amount of politicking that currently makes the business of government move at a crawl.

    Yes ThegaXen

  • Career politicians need to take a hike, they become interest serving.

    Politics becomes a career case for some politicians and make the most out of their office while they can. Sometimes for their own businesses, or case, and ideality compared to our own. When we don't have these career officials, new ideas with old implementations can be better served, and less personal interests filled.

    Yes Bear

  • Habit is strong, but in a changing world, habitually re-elected officials are weak

    Incumbents have a natural advantage over challengers. They have a resume of accomplishments in office, name recognition, and existing fund-raising networks. As Senator Byrd of West Virginia has demonstrated, incumbents often serve until death or severe disgrace. They may also be continually re-elected by a network of supporters who prefer the status quo over improvement, the old Alzheimer's patient who votes as he is told over those who will represent the will of the people today. Most importantly, term limits mean fresh people without the ties to the corrupting influence of lobbyists. We need term limits to ensure that elected officials are cycled through without picking up Washington values over those of the electorate.

    Yes Pir4And

  • Elected representatives should be citizens that represent for a time and then return to their lives in the real world.

    Elected representatives that serve for extended periods of time somehow seem to lose contact with what is important to their constituents. When they serve for too long, they only worry about being reelected instead of voting on what is best for the country and their constituents. Term limits would also help to reduce the advantage that incumbents have in elections.

    Yes ddeathnote

  • Yes, term limits should exist to keep the politicians from abusing power.

    Term limits should be in place for all federally elected officials. Without limits in place we risk corruption. Senators especially, seem to lose touch with the people that elected them. An incumbent senator is extremely hard to vote out of office. Two terms and done should be the law of the land for all politicians, not just the president.

    Yes BriaBlacken
Voice Your Opinion
No
13% of users

  • No, because limiting how many terms an official can serve only turns them into a shortsighted fool.

    In theory, limiting how many terms an elected official can serve would help prevent the abuse of power. But in practice, it will turn out people like the president. Someone who knows that they will not be in office next year to deal with the fall out of a foolish plan, so they don't care. Plus, it is easy enough to get a corrupt, lazy or incompetent official into office. But if they actually manage to elect an honest official, I would hate to have to kick him out of office because his number of terms is up.

    No H_Baird

  • Everybody knows that individual politicians are like cast members of Cats, individuals may change but the show goes on.

    Term limits on politicians indicates more administration change than is likely to be happening, it's like painting a happy face on a warhead. What we need is less law and fewer politicians, and that won't be the end result of changing them around more often. Fewer politicians will be like having fewer cats. No one cares if the neighborhood cat lady has the same 118 cats or if she rotates them with other cats, they just want the stink, mess, public nuisance and eyesore gone from their neighborhood. Why change the around when we simply want less of them, period?

    No groovybox

  • They should not limit the number of terms elected officials may serve.

    I do not believe they should limit the number of terms elected officials can serve. Especially with presidents they really should not limit the terms they can serve. If the official is doing the job correctly they should not limit it. If the official is not they should be able to get a new one without so much work to do it.

    No barbiegirll

  • No term of office limits should be imposed on elected officials.

    The American political system, while not perfect, is a well balanced machine which achieves its fundamental goals. Individuals who hold elective office should not be constrained by term limits inasmuch as certain objectives cannot be completed within the term of office. What people do not realize is the fact that the American people already have the power to remove public officials. When the term of office is about to expire, the people have the right to choose a different person to hold the office. Candidates often win reelection not because of name recognition, but due to the fact they have actually done a good job while in office and deserve to be reelected.

    No AGalloway
Voice Your Opinion

Related Debates

Debate Topics

 
 
Should limits exist on the number of terms elected officials may serve?
Top of Page
© 2010 Juggle, LLC
All Rights Reserved
Encyclopedia & Reference Resource