Blogs > New Haven Register Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor of the New Haven Register, New Haven, Connecticut, http://nhregister.com. Email to letters@nhregister.com.

Saturday, July 13, 2013

Term limits needed for members of U.S. Congress

Congress and the Senate have an approval rating of under 20 percent. Continual bipartisan bickering; politicians bowing down to special interests funding their next campaign and not addressing the needs of the country makes a valid argument for term limits.
House Speaker John Boehner, son of a tavern owner, is more interested in cutting taxes for the country club set with whom he can play golf than passing legislation. His inability to control the Tea Party shelved the budget agreement he had agreed to with the President Barack Obama. Senator Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., whose single purpose is to defeat any Obama proposal (he failed to prevent the president’s second term, his avowed strategy) offers no solutions on immigration, infrastructure needs, tax reform, et al. He would rather filibuster.
On the Democratic side, there is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who was unable to get the Senate to pass a gun control bill requiring background checks despite 90 percent of Americans supporting such a proposal.
These are just a few examples of how ineffective our elected officials are in performing their duties. With gerrymandered districts, we are stuck with elected officials, good or bad, as long as they determine to hold office. Our founding fathers never intended to create permanent jobs for congressmen and senators. It was expected that a citizen would serve his term and return to original employment.
With term limits we may throw out some “babies with the bath water,” but based on popular opinion 80 percent of our elected, ineffective officials would be ousted sooner rather than later.
A proposal might be two four-year terms for Congress. As it is now, two-year terms have elected officials doing nothing but fundraising and campaigning. Senators should be elected for one six-year term (two if more practical). I would suggest one six-year term for the president, so he or she does not have to spend two years campaigning for re-election.
A solution might be limiting campaigns for all elective office to three months with public funding. Eliminate private, corporate and union financing. The amount of money spent on national elections is obscene. The question is how to bring term limits to referendum. We know our politicians will not initiate legislation.
Robert F. O’Such
Guilford

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

With representation based on gerrymandered districts, term limits will serve no purpose.

July 14, 2013 at 9:59 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

we for sure need term limits for any public office, no one should make a career out of public service because thats what it is public service , when they are in to long they lose sight of what is good for the ppl and start thinking what is best for themselves,,what they can put in their pockets whether thats money or ppl..

July 15, 2013 at 10:12 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home