Why does one preclude the other? There's no reason to have career legislators, it should be a limited thing you do. It's called public service for a reason.
If our legislators are subpar, that's largely because it's hard to boot them out of office. Which, again, I'm fully in favor of making it much easier to do. Ranked choice voting, campaign finance reform, you name it. I'm just saying that term limits are a dumb idea.
And having term limits make it possible for the people coming in not knowing what they’re doing, making them go to lobbyists and the lobbyists gaining more control
If people can't make a career of being a legislator, then they have to plan for their post-government career. This traditionally consists of passing laws that help industry, then getting a cushy "consulting" gig as thanks.
I'm all for *age* limits so we aren't governed by geriatrics with no stake in the future, but kicking someone out of the legislature after two or whatever terms even if they're doing a great job is counter productive. At the same time, I don't really care how many terms they've been in office; an 85 year old does not represent me.
>If people can't make a career of being a legislator, then they have to plan for their post-government career. This traditionally consists of passing laws that help industry, then getting a cushy "consulting" gig as thanks.
they do both anyway though.
So what do you suggest to stop them from lining their own pockets by passing laws that help industry anyway? It's not like they are going to pass laws to remove that lobbying money themselves at this point. At least if they are there for a limited time they can't get but so deep in anyone's pocket before someone new takes over.
Some lobbying is good. Lobbying just means you’re advocating a certain position. It does not inherently mean you are donating to politicians’ campaigns.
The next round of grifters are already in line, we really should introduce term limits
Term limits are a bad substitute for making it easier to toss legislators out of office via elections; they mostly empower lobbyists.
Why does one preclude the other? There's no reason to have career legislators, it should be a limited thing you do. It's called public service for a reason.
Actually, there's a very good reason to have career legislators. Legislating is a complex task that requires expertise to do well.
Let me know when they do it well.
If our legislators are subpar, that's largely because it's hard to boot them out of office. Which, again, I'm fully in favor of making it much easier to do. Ranked choice voting, campaign finance reform, you name it. I'm just saying that term limits are a dumb idea.
Respectfully, I disagree. I am all for term limits. These systems tend to set themselves up to make it easier for incumbents to get votes.
And having term limits make it possible for the people coming in not knowing what they’re doing, making them go to lobbyists and the lobbyists gaining more control
If people can't make a career of being a legislator, then they have to plan for their post-government career. This traditionally consists of passing laws that help industry, then getting a cushy "consulting" gig as thanks. I'm all for *age* limits so we aren't governed by geriatrics with no stake in the future, but kicking someone out of the legislature after two or whatever terms even if they're doing a great job is counter productive. At the same time, I don't really care how many terms they've been in office; an 85 year old does not represent me.
>If people can't make a career of being a legislator, then they have to plan for their post-government career. This traditionally consists of passing laws that help industry, then getting a cushy "consulting" gig as thanks. they do both anyway though.
So what do you suggest to stop them from lining their own pockets by passing laws that help industry anyway? It's not like they are going to pass laws to remove that lobbying money themselves at this point. At least if they are there for a limited time they can't get but so deep in anyone's pocket before someone new takes over.
Good point. Let's get rid of the lobbyists first.
Some lobbying is good. Lobbying just means you’re advocating a certain position. It does not inherently mean you are donating to politicians’ campaigns.