Full Answer Opponents to term limits argue that they are not necessary because Congress must be re-elected regularly.
Having a president in this position can allow him more power as time goes on. From to all the presidents were Republican. I am sure Theodore Roosevelt and Taft would argue differently. Libertarians are the only genuine current heirs of Jefferson, Paine, Jackson, and the abolitionists.
This is due to the name recognition and financial advantages the incumbent receives while in office. Yet the "will of the people" bought into this and he was re-elected.
You argue that because there are no term limits on senators and congressmen, it decreases democracy. This debate shall be about Term Limits in the United States. No system of government is perfect. So you defeat yourself. The Legislature can keep running over and over, the Judicial is for life, and the President is limited.
No legislator accomplishes much without smart staffers and alliances with other legislators. And yes my response before was late. They think Obama is an Arab and Iraq had something to do with the attacks on September 11th.
Bad presidents will not get re-elected because they were bad. No arguing in the words. The Libertarian Manifesto" by Murray N.
A President is 70 years old. If a candidate gets re-elected this means that the public likes what he is doing and would like to have him serve one more or even several more terms.
Change is needed in government to survive. I just have to show that we should not have term limits. In conclusion, my opponent just gave an opinion. And sometimes the will of the people can be reluctant for that change. Therefore my side is reality. I could keep going with examples of the "will of the people" but again Congressional inequalities prevent effective and necessary actions by frank politicians who are willing to perform their duties and aid those who are willing to get rich off their positions.
I am against them, and my opponent is in favor of them. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. Even without them, no president had more than 2 terms, before the 22nd Amendment.
There must be a reason that these people get re-elected. I agree to the rules and look forward to the debate. Kennedy and Kerry have not done bad jobs. Be the first to know. It was not until Andrew Jackson that the first public election was held.
For sure, there should be a limit on the amount congressional candidates can spend on the campaigns and that would be a way to solve problems arising in the area. Back in that day you speak, politicians were celebrities.
He was elected four times. Economic freedom is also an indispensable means toward the achievement of political freedom. Lewis When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
House of Representatives, and an 83 percent re-election rate in the Senate.
Also, this can be seen in our own history with Roosevelt which will also be explained with my next point.The arguments against term limits Career politicians should be valued for their experience.
If we regularly fill a Congressional office with a newcomer, we will lose the valuable experience on-the-job that person can offer in government. Oct 15, · In the vote, she said,voted for term limits,voted against andmade no choice on term limits. In, people voted to keep the limits at two terms,voted to extend the number of terms to three, and “a startling ,″ expressed no opinion on the matter.
The argument against term limits is so well known that it has become axiomatic. Such restrictions on the membership of legislative bodies, it is. The arguments for term limits in Congress include: putting a limit on time in office means less time to develop financial ties to lobbyists and special interest groups, and congressmen are more likely to fight for constituents.
The below paper will present objective political arguments for and against the Congressional term limits. Firstly, the arguments for the term limits will be presented, the arguments against them will proceed, followed by the conclusion drawn by the author based on the conducted research.
The most common argument against term limits goes something like this: "We already have term limits. They're called elections." The primary case against term limits is that, indeed, our elected officials in the House and Senate must face their constituents every two years or every six years and get their approval.Download