Term limits

Thoughts 18 comments

What public figure do you disagree with the most?

First, like many, I have been a bit disappointed by WP’s daily prompts. Seems like they’re phoning it in, recycling old prompts…and the new ones lack any depth that would invite thoughtful responses.

And even worse, they put up stuff like today’s prompt, which will only sow divisiveness in the WP community. Yes, politics should be discussed, but I’m not sure it’s appropriate here, for a group of folks who are focused on creativity and mutual respect and support.

That being said, I think we need term limits. Some of these people…on both sides… have been there decades. They get on committees, form cliques, get into bed with lobbyists, and fancy themselves above it all, forgetting about or ignoring those they’re supposed to be representing.

They have term limits for the highest seat in government… why not for the House and Senate?

18 comments

  2. I agree with everything you’ve said in this post Darryl Unforunately Congress has the only power to over ride term limits and we all know that greed will prevent them from doing that. Have a great week-end my friend.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  3. I completely agree with you about having term limits. And also about WP’s prompts. I’ve noticed that they are getting more political and in general I don’t mind politics being discussed but it always gets messy like on social media. I liked that on WP the focus was just our content not our personal beliefs.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  4. Totally hear you, Darryl! These WP prompts really should keep the focus on creativity rather than diving into divisive topics. As for term limits, it’s a no-brainer. Fresh ideas and perspectives are crucial, and we can’t get that if the same folks cling to power forever.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  6. Also, discussing things like this is good only to a certain extent. At least to some people, only if there is some chance of a discussion being done. Without any proper discussion, Prompts would look more mundane. I feel so. Obviously, perspectives could differ.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  8. My position on term limits is that we already have them and they’re called “Elections”, but the process is overly skewed by money, especially in the wake of the Citizens United decision. If you term-limit people out of the legislature, you’re going to end up with even more influential lobbyists, because they’ll never leave and will become a de facto establishment of their own steering inexperienced reps towards the goals they want. What I think we need to do is get all the corporate money and PACs and all that out of the elections and replace it with a standard baseline funding amount for each candidate who makes it to the general—say, enough to run advertising in their local market—plus whatever they can raise from actual donations from individuals, up to some capped amount, and let them fight it out on more or less even ground.

    Of course, that’ll never happen, so maybe term limits are the best we can do. Although honestly I doubt that’ll ever happen either … 😬

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a Reply