Sunday, June 28, 2015

Term Limits, again

I have posted on this blog previously that Term Limits are bad. If you do not have term limits then the election process is 90% in favor of the the incumbent, 10% for the challenger. Barbara Cornish does not under stand this or she chooses to ignore its meaning.

A quick google search brings up the following opinion regarding the cons of Term Limits.

1. There are many who believe that Congressional term limits help to root out corruption. Being a member of Congress is an awesome amount of power and those who are exposed to vast amounts of power over longer periods of time are more likely to start making decisions based in their own self-interest, as opposed to listening to their constituents.
2. Serving as a member of Congress is not supposed to be what one chooses as their choice of career. Those who choose to serve as members of Congress are supposed to do because of noble reasoning, not as a means to make money and ensure that they are employed in perpetuity. Term limits keep those who desire power and money out of Congress. And those after power out of UCO administration.
3. Congress thrives when new ideas are allowed to flourish. When the same old people sit in the same old seats year after year, this can lead to stagnation and a lack of fresh decision making. A government body works best when people are allowed to infuse new ideas and come up with plans that exist outside of the box.


2 comments:

  1. THE SUPREME COURT HAS NO TERM LIMITS, THEY ARE APPOINTED, CENTURY VILLAGE IS NO SUPREME COURT. EVEN IF SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT, THE SUPREME COURT. BEING IN UCO ISN'T A LIFE TIME JOB.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Go back and read the Posting again. No where am I talking about the Supreme Court. The post talks about Congress which is similar to UCO Elected Administrators. The main thing here is that Power Corrupts and Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The longer one is in office the more likely to become corrupted.

    ReplyDelete