diane feinstein-r.i.p.

[maltdizzy]

No, we need term limits.

From my experience in states with term limits, they lead to more dysfunction. The freshly elected representatives tend to be unyielding idealists who refuse to compromise on anything, and nothing gets done. By the time they learn the art of negotiation/compromise, they are termed out and replaced with new idealist and it starts all over again. The flip-side is they are less concerned with earning more campaign donations. Damned if you do, damned if you don't; there is probably a middle ground somewhere. An elected official can be removed with every election... the issues are excessive money and an indifferent populous.

Rather than a blanket age limit, the senate and house should no longer be elected positions.

Using the last census as the basis, a random list of people should be selected that match as many of the ratios by age bracket and race as closely as possible.

Those people then get a letter in the mail like jury duty letting them know that start in January for the next 2 or 6 years.

A true representative government.

My first reaction to this was "how you been outside and seen the great unwashed?" But there may be something to this. Statistically, if you select a person, business, etc. at random there are more likely to be trustworthy than someone who volunteers their services.

 

[kdonnel]

Yeah, sure. Then we can have a government where nobody knows how anything works and institutional knowledge doesn't exist. Great idea.

Why is politics the only field where we insist on hiring new people with no experience and no skills? I'll never understand that.

The institutional knowledge is currently held by the people actually doing the work not the politicians and would in my system as well. The congressional staff are our shadow government.

 

[HeatherC]

Yeah, sure. Then we can have a government where nobody knows how anything works and institutional knowledge doesn't exist. Great idea.

Why is politics the only field where we insist on hiring new people with no experience and no skills? I'll never understand that.

And they are doing such a great job.

 

[Kwami]

The institutional knowledge is currently held by the people actually doing the work not the politicians and would in my system as well. The congressional staff are our shadow government.

Most of the congressional staff usually come with the politician when they're elected. They're advisors from previous positions and previous campaigns. There are some staffers that seem to jump from one representative to another, but not most of them.

It's getting somewhat harder to find good staffers, too, since they're constantly dealing with government shutdowns, changes to their healthcare, low pay, and death threats.

Also, asking someone to serve a few days to a few weeks on a jury is somewhat disruptive. Asking someone to serve 2-6 years is incredibly disruptive. Will they still have a job after? What if they have kids in school? What if they're taking care of elderly relatives? Or they're struggling with illness? Or they just don't want to serve in government? Are we really proposing to force people to serve in Congress? What happened to individual liberty?

 

[Ms.Minnie]

Most of the congressional staff usually come with the politician when they're elected. They're advisors from previous positions and previous campaigns. There are some staffers that seem to jump from one representative to another, but not most of them.

It's getting somewhat harder to find good staffers, too, since they're constantly dealing with government shutdowns, changes to their healthcare, low pay, and death threats.

Also, asking someone to serve a few days to a few weeks on a jury is somewhat disruptive. Asking someone to serve 2-6 years is incredibly disruptive. Will they still have a job after? What if they have kids in school? What if they're taking care of elderly relatives? Or they're struggling with illness? Or they just don't want to serve in government? Are we really proposing to force people to serve in Congress? What happened to individual liberty?

If this were to come about which is highly unlikely, I would think there would be an optout clause for various reasons you mentioned.

 

[GAN]

She had an impressive career, but should have retired ages ago. We need an age cutoff for public office.

First of all, sorry to hear of her passing.

I disagree. Why prevent someone who is older(maybe wiser) from holding office if they're competent? My father is 92 and he could run circles around most people in office today regarding legislative issues. I hear what you're saying in this particular case(and others), but I'm not for limiting my choices -especially these days. Now, term limits that may be something on the table, especially in the House.

 

[gmi3804]

Isn't working until the day you die the 'murican Way?

 

[Marrila]

First of all, sorry to hear of her passing.

I disagree. Why prevent someone who is older(maybe wiser) from holding office if they're competent? My father is 92 and he could run circles around most people in office today regarding legislative issues. I hear what you're saying in this particular case(and others), but I'm not for limiting my choices -especially these days. Now, term limits that may be something on the table, especially in the House.

I think it's sweet your daddy is 92 and still with you. But 90+ is far too old to be working.

 

[Kwami]

I disagree. Why prevent someone who is older(maybe wiser) from holding office if they're competent? My father is 92 and he could run circles around most people in office today regarding legislative issues. I hear what you're saying in this particular case(and others), but I'm not for limiting my choices -especially these days. Now, term limits that may be something on the table, especially in the House.

Term limits are just another way to reduce your choices, though. If you think that someone has been there too long and is no longer effective, then vote for someone else.

 

[soccerdad72]

First of all, sorry to hear of her passing.

I disagree. Why prevent someone who is older(maybe wiser) from holding office if they're competent? My father is 92 and he could run circles around most people in office today regarding legislative issues. I hear what you're saying in this particular case(and others), but I'm not for limiting my choices -especially these days. Now, term limits that may be something on the table, especially in the House.

Age shouldn't necessarily be a determining factor, but some sort of competency exam should be. My father has had three tests for early dementia (unfortunately, he is showing signs of it) in the past 6 months and he's not voting on legislation that shapes the country. Sen. Feinstein, may she rest in peace, was not in any mental condition in her last few months to be voting on anything.

 

[GAN]

I think it's sweet your daddy is 92 and still with you. But 90+ is far too old to be working.

Ha ...tell him that!

 

[Moliphino]

First of all, sorry to hear of her passing.

I disagree. Why prevent someone who is older(maybe wiser) from holding office if they're competent? My father is 92 and he could run circles around most people in office today regarding legislative issues. I hear what you're saying in this particular case(and others), but I'm not for limiting my choices -especially these days. Now, term limits that may be something on the table, especially in the House.

We have minimum ages, why not maximum? Why do we have 80-90 year olds making laws that they won't even live to see the consequences of?

 

[GAN]

Term limits are just another way to reduce your choices, though. If you think that someone has been there too long and is no longer effective, then vote for someone else.

I think in the House is where it could work. I think after 10-years, politicians become too entrenched, backed by too much money, have a tendency to become corrupt. Fresh ideas every 10-years hurts no one. The Senate is a completely different thing and feel that shouldn't change. Just my own thoughts....

 

[Ms.Minnie]

I think it's sweet your daddy is 92 and still with you. But 90+ is far too old to be working.

That is your opinion, not everyone will agree with you. I'm not saying I agree or don't I'm just saying that a blanket statement like that is just your opinion.

Term limits are just another way to reduce your choices, though. If you think that someone has been there too long and is no longer effective, then vote for someone else.

People do but there are a lot of people who just vote for a name they recognize with no real knowledge of who that person is or what their record is.

Age shouldn't necessarily be a determining factor, but some sort of competency exam should be. My father has had three tests for early dementia (unfortunately, he is showing signs of it) in the past 6 months and he's not voting on legislation that shapes the country. Sen. Feinstein, may she rest in peace, was not in any mental condition in her last few months to be voting on anything.

This exactely. There is no set age when a person is no longer competent enough to be in an elected office. The only way to really determine this is with competency testing.

 

[GAN]

We have minimum ages, why not maximum? Why do we have 80-90 year olds making laws that they won't even live to see the consequences of?

I'm not sure that even makes sense. One person can't enact a law in the United States, so even if like you say the 90-year old wants to eliminate SS because they won't need it soon ....you would still need to convince a majority of legislators to go along with you.

 

[MillauFr]

No, we need term limits.

I prefer the voters make that decision on when a certain politician has to go.

 

[MillauFr]

RIP.
So now the Governor has a tough choice of who to pick....

I vote for the Terminator. What else is he doing other than filling potholes in front of his house?

 

[Marrila]

That is your opinion, not everyone will agree with you. I'm not saying I agree or don't I'm just saying that a blanket statement like that is just your opinion.

OK. Most of what we do on the DIS boards is share opinions.

 

[TippyThomas]

In before...

 

[Dan Murphy]

One thing I would like to see, but will never happen, is for the House members to have 4 year terms rather than the current 2. They get elected and after 6 months they are running for their next term. Too much time spent on electioneering. I am sure there was some good, logical reason for our framers to make it so short, but I am not aware of what that would be.