,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
I'm opposed to "term limits."
For one thing, we already have term limits. They're called elections. Voters can turn out any politician they like, on a regular basis. (1/4)
For one thing, we already have term limits. They're called elections. Voters can turn out any politician they like, on a regular basis. (1/4)
And with all this talk about the power of incumbency, think of the gauntlet an incumbent has to run.
Voters get TWO shots at taking out a Congressman every two years--his own side gets a shot at him during the primary, and the other party gets a shot during the general. (2/4)
Voters get TWO shots at taking out a Congressman every two years--his own side gets a shot at him during the primary, and the other party gets a shot during the general. (2/4)
Besides, it doesn't accomplish its goal of better representation. Turns over more power to the permanent bureaucracy. Met a guy in a term limit state years ago who was Chair of the Ways and Means Committee in his SECOND year. He was nearly clueless, asking us for help. (3/4)
And popular candidates run for the senate when they are term limited in the house. Then, when term limited in the senate, they go back and run in the house again. It's stupid, harmful, and unnecessary. There's a reason term limits weren't in the Constitution. (4/4)
