It would be tough and take several years; however, in my opinion, it would solve a lot of problems. I would like to propose one term for the president (6yrs); US Senators (8yrs) and US representative (4yrs). With no reason to do things to get re-elected, these elected officials might begin doing what is best of the country instead of what is best to get re-elected. I would also recommend "grandfathering" all current officials under the current rules (i.e. president 2 terms or 10 years through order of succession), if necessary, to get congress to propose the amendment (requires 2/3 vote) to the states. I firmly believe 75% of the states would approve. Does AMAC have a position on term limits?
in the founding days of this Republic it was against the law to "advertise" that you were seeking public office as Representative in DC and Senators were appointed by State House Legislators
returning to the Constitution as written would serve the same purpose you are proposing WITHOUT changing the Constitution (again)
What say you ?
__________________
Old Retired guy living in Costa Rica and tracking the communists electronically - starting with the marxist in the whitehouse
You are correct on the framers intentions; however, the state's legislatures are composed of individuals who are "career" elected officials and you have the same problem with them.I don’t see what would prohibit the states from sending the same person to DC each term since the states have a vested interest in their senator bring “pork” money back to the state which might not be the best for the country in the long run.Also, it could result in some states not being represented as it happened in the mid to late 1800’s.Anytime you have “career” elected officials, state or federal and never conceived by the framers, they will be pawns of the ones who have the power to control their reelection.Term limits are the only way to put people in power to serve the people instead of serving their self.
If we could undue some changes and go back to the framers as Bob said all would be good but i see no way to get proper representation until we get rid of the fed income tax, than have each state pay to run the federal government. At that point the state would send reps that would limit gov spending or the people would change the state's reps. Than you would not need term limits. IMHO
You are correct about the representatives and senators were appointed by the state legislators. However, as indicated below in my post of 01/22/14, I think you will still have the same problem. I understand that there might be other ways; but, at this point the only way I see is term limits. With some many PAC's and the rulings by the court that it is freedom of speech, you have to have people serve that are not going to be reelected to the same position. Needless to say, we might still have "career" elected officials as they move from local, county, state, US representative, US senator and president; but, that would be better than we have today. Also, no laws should be passed by any body of elected officials that does not apply to those that passed and/or signed the laws AND all current laws that exempt elected officials should be changed to include everyone. If it is good enough for me, than it should be good enough for those that were elected to serve us. NO EXECEPTIONS!!!
Sorry, I can't agree on eliminated of income tax and the states fund the US government. The state have demonstrated they can't managed their own finances and if that happened, the states that controlled their budget would be left with the burden of supporting the US government. Do we need to do something about the reckless spending in Washington, without a doubt. With term limits, maybe we could get a balanced budget - if you don't have it, you can't spend it. Exception might be necessary in a properly declared war.
