gas

[QUOTE=jcb;580678]Agree, with one small caveat: it's not that politicians don't *know how to disagree in earnest, respectfully yet candidly, it's that they've done the math and it's not what we voters want. Compromise is a death sentence when both sides have convinced the bulk of their base that the other side is Satan reincarnated.[/QUOTE]

TERM Limits fix this.

It is amazing that TERM limits have to be instituted via constitutional amendment.
It is amazing that the House and Senate can CHANGE the rules that govern them.
It is amazing that they went from a small stiped for service to a full salary and benefits.
It is amazing that MOST Americans want term limits.

IT's AMAZING, ain't it.

Later,

Geo

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;580682]TERM Limits fix this.

It is amazing that TERM limits have to be instituted via constitutional amendment.
It is amazing that the House and Senate can CHANGE the rules that govern them.
It is amazing that they went from a small stiped for service to a full salary and benefits.
It is amazing that MOST Americans want term limits.

IT's AMAZING, ain't it.

Later,

Geo[/QUOTE]

I'm not sold on term limits. Mixed results where they've been tried. They might actually make the problem worse; elect a corrupt politician, they're just going to be more corrupt in fewer years than they would be if they had more years. Although we do a crappy job of holding politicians accountable, the need for re-election has at least SOME mitigating effect on corruption.

To be in favor of term limits, I'd have to believe we'd elect better people, or have better candidates. I'm not sure that's what will happen. We have term limits, it's electing a better representative; but we can't seem to do that.

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;580681]I was a democrat for years..........and HATED voting for Trump..........but Trump's basic ideology aligns more with me than the democrats.

WE are so fractured now, I'm not sure we will ever get to good governance. It is a **** shame.

Later,

Geo[/QUOTE]I feel the exact same way George.

[QUOTE=jcb;580685]I'm not sold on term limits. Mixed results where they've been tried. They might actually make the problem worse; elect a corrupt politician, they're just going to be more corrupt in fewer years than they would be if they had more years. Although we do a crappy job of holding politicians accountable, the need for re-election has at least SOME mitigating effect on corruption.

To be in favor of term limits, I'd have to believe we'd elect better people, or have better candidates. I'm not sure that's what will happen. We have term limits, it's electing a better representative; but we can't seem to do that.[/QUOTE]

UM, they have not been tried...........the Supreme court determined that Term Limits were unconstitutional .......
I believe they existed for about 3 years.

so, I'd like to know about your statement about where tried......WHERE have they been tried?
[I][B]
A movement in favor of term limits took hold in the early 1990s, and reached its apex in 1992-94, a period when 17 states enacted term limits through state legislation or state constitutional amendments.[29]

Many of the laws enacted limited terms for both the state legislature and in the state's delegation to Congress; as they pertain to Congress, these laws were struck down as unconstitutional by U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995), in which the court ruled, on a 5–4 vote, that state governments cannot limit the terms of members of the national government.[29][30]

Where rotation in the legislative branch has withstood court challenges, term limits continue to garner popular support. As of 2002, the advocacy group "U.S. Term Limits" found that in the 17 states where state legislators served in rotation, public support for term limits ranged from 60 to 78 percent.[31]
[/B][/I]


[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_limits_in_the_United_States[/url]

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;580690]UM, they have not been tried...........the Supreme court determined that Term Limits were unconstitutional .......
I believe they existed for about 3 years.

so, I'd like to know about your statement about where tried......WHERE have they been tried?
[][/QUOTE]

Some 20+ states.

[url]https://www.pegasuskentucky.org/post/2019/07/31/term-limits-are-popular-there-is-little-evidence-they-are-effective[/url]

let's try something different...what we're doing ain't workin!!!

[QUOTE=jcb;580691]Some 20+ states.

[url]https://www.pegasuskentucky.org/post/2019/07/31/term-limits-are-popular-there-is-little-evidence-they-are-effective[/url][/QUOTE]

I really don't CARE about state term limits. It is at the FEDERAL level where they spend trillions of dollars and work whatever deal KEEPS them in office.


Later,

Geo

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;580693]I really don't CARE about state term limits. It is at the FEDERAL level where they spend trillions of dollars and work whatever deal KEEPS them in office.


Later,

Geo[/QUOTE]

I think that's true at the state level on a smaller scale obviously, but I think the principle still applies. We can have all the term limits we want, but if we keep electing bozos it won't solve a thing.

[QUOTE=jcb;580694]I think that's true at the state level on a smaller scale obviously, but I think the principle still applies. We can have all the term limits we want, but if we keep electing bozos it won't solve a thing.[/QUOTE]

hate to say it but most people running for office are only interested in power and money.
we have to take away their ability to use the office for personal gain.

[QUOTE=dragmerc;580697]hate to say it but most people running for office are only interested in power and money.
we have to take away their ability to use the office for personal gain.[/QUOTE]

Agree 100%. But I still think if an unethical dude/dudette gets elected they're going to get theirs in whatever time they have. Maybe faster and more corrupt because they can't afford the luxury of being patient.

Another thing term limits have done, where they've been tried, is transferred the real power from the elected officials to their staff. The staff then bounces from official to official when the official's term is up. And they don't even have to be "out there" in public like the politician does, basically a shadow government.

What I could definitely get behind would be strictly enforced conflict of interest laws, more in-depth disclosure requirements, and post-office lobbying bans both for the officials and their staffs. I think that would help a lot more than term limits.

It's called voting the people out of office. The voters get to decide their term limits.

Not sure how we got so far off the thread OP post about gas prices.

I saw the other day that we will run out of oil in 30 years. Not sure if that's true but we are consuming oil at record rates with the human population being so high and places like China and India using more gasoline/diesel in their cars and trucks than ever before. Oil is a finite resource. We will need alternative to oil in the future.

[QUOTE=jcb;580694]I think that's true at the state level on a smaller scale obviously, but I think the principle still applies. We can have all the term limits we want, but if we keep electing bozos it won't solve a thing.[/QUOTE]

I think you are wrong. WE keep the same IDIOTS in power every single year because in a whole lot of areas, people are too effing stupid to understand WHY they get what they get.

I mean the Maxine Water's of the world, and the Pelosi's and the Schumer's............There are plenty of them also on the Right, but you get my drift.

Maxine Waters is the most IGNORANT ass-backwards, politician in office. AND she is there for ONE SINGLE REASON, and ONE REASON only.

Same thing for Hank "guam is tipping over" Johnson.

Later,

Geo