5 ms·

We need election reform but I'm against term or age limits. Encourage younger voters and politicians. Remove the current age limits as we're obviously not usin

We need election reform but I'm against term or age limits. Encourage younger voters and politicians. Remove the current age limits as we're obviously not using them. Make state positions something a young person can live on, right now they have to keep their job and hope the boss is ok with them campaigning for months to just do a short legislative session. Change campaign laws, Citizens United has shoved so much money into the system, we campaign for months, reducing the effectiveness of elected incumbents and winnowing out the candidates who can't fund raise the entire time. Uncap the House, they passed legislation in the 1920's to limit their number to 435. Meanwhile they are now granted staff based on the population of their state. We now have more legislative staff than we would have Representatives if we kept to the original 30,000:1 that George Washington did the first presidential veto to keep.

jmward01 23d ago
I think age is a bad marker to go off of as well. Different people age in different ways. My point about term limits is limiting total power a person can wield in their lifetime. As a thought experiment, consider if people could live to 300. Do you think any of the entrenched politicians would give up power after 100 years? 200? Would McConnell or Pelosi give up their positions? I can guarantee you that we would still have politicians leaving only because they died after well over 200 years in office. Democracy demands a diversity of voices. Term limits are a cheap way of getting new ones in regularly. Limits can be reasonable to ensure there is experience, but they need to be there or else we will devolve into entrenched power as the only power.
- wat10000 23d ago
  What we really need is better voters. Term limits are a hack trying to work around the voters wanting to elect the same person over and over again. No, I have no idea how you fix that.
  - jmward01 23d ago
    A 'hack' that works has a different name, it is called a solution. You will never get 'better voters'. Wishing and wanting for something isn't a plan. How do we get better voters? What is the system that encourages democracy to work? Allowing power to entrench will lead to entrenched power. Show me a system that doesn't involve hoping people suddenly become 'better voters' without term limits and I will jump on board. My plan is to push for actions that encourage diversity in our democratic processes like limiting money, term limits, removing gerrymandering, etc. These are actionable things that encourage the true core of a democracy, diversity of voice.
    - wat10000 23d ago
      But does it work or does it just entrench the power somewhere else? I'm not really opposed to term limits but I'm not convinced they work too well. And they're just distasteful. They're saying, "we know better than the voters." It's a pretty minor version of that statement, but it is nonetheless.
    - jfengel 22d ago
      I actually have an idea for getting better voters. Remove the age limits -- on both ends. If you can pull the lever or otherwise unambiguously indicate your choice, you can vote. Obviously this opens up the vote to people who are uneducated and incapable of thinking beyond the shortest term. In other words, not all that much different from existing voters. The voter won't be better, per se, but they will be different. They will have their own interests, which currently have no voice. We don't impose intelligence tests on voters. We go on the assumption that somehow, the wisdom of crowds will make up for individual failings. But we're excluding millions of people from that, and they might well make the difference.
      - wat10000 22d ago
        “On both ends”? Who has an upper age limit?
  - undersuit 23d ago
    I think the 3 ideas I mentioned above are helpful nudges to reduce incumbency. There are other ways, like Australia's mandatory voting, or the DSA's Abolish the Senate proposal that we're less ready for.
    - jmward01 23d ago
      My final argument about term limits actually is news today. Politicians will throw out democracy to stay in power by disenfranchising people. You want to stay in power? Just make sure the other side can't vote. Use your authority to block them getting ballots. Put a poll tax on them. Arrest them then take their vote because you arrested them. Or, just don't deliver their mail because your side decided they aren't properly registered. We need checks on these people that force them out. I will take occasionally having a good one not serve quite long enough for the other 99% to be tossed out before they can take the whole system down. Historically only death pushes the worst ones out. That will always be true unless we put term limits in place to force them out another way.
      - undersuit 23d ago
        >We need checks on these people that force them out. So you're going to vote for checks on these people but you're not going to vote them out?
        jmward01 23d ago
        I do both and I get involved locally. There isn't one magic solution. Some make more difference than others.
        undersuit 23d ago
        Term limits isn't going to get a better candidate, voting for the better candidate would.

jmward01 23d ago

I think age is a bad marker to go off of as well. Different people age in different ways. My point about term limits is limiting total power a person can wield in their lifetime. As a thought experiment, consider if people could live to 300. Do you think any of the entrenched politicians would give up power after 100 years? 200? Would McConnell or Pelosi give up their positions? I can guarantee you that we would still have politicians leaving only because they died after well over 200 years in office. Democracy demands a diversity of voices. Term limits are a cheap way of getting new ones in regularly. Limits can be reasonable to ensure there is experience, but they need to be there or else we will devolve into entrenched power as the only power.

wat10000 23d ago
What we really need is better voters. Term limits are a hack trying to work around the voters wanting to elect the same person over and over again. No, I have no idea how you fix that.
- jmward01 23d ago
  A 'hack' that works has a different name, it is called a solution. You will never get 'better voters'. Wishing and wanting for something isn't a plan. How do we get better voters? What is the system that encourages democracy to work? Allowing power to entrench will lead to entrenched power. Show me a system that doesn't involve hoping people suddenly become 'better voters' without term limits and I will jump on board. My plan is to push for actions that encourage diversity in our democratic processes like limiting money, term limits, removing gerrymandering, etc. These are actionable things that encourage the true core of a democracy, diversity of voice.
  - wat10000 23d ago
    But does it work or does it just entrench the power somewhere else? I'm not really opposed to term limits but I'm not convinced they work too well. And they're just distasteful. They're saying, "we know better than the voters." It's a pretty minor version of that statement, but it is nonetheless.
  - jfengel 22d ago
    I actually have an idea for getting better voters. Remove the age limits -- on both ends. If you can pull the lever or otherwise unambiguously indicate your choice, you can vote. Obviously this opens up the vote to people who are uneducated and incapable of thinking beyond the shortest term. In other words, not all that much different from existing voters. The voter won't be better, per se, but they will be different. They will have their own interests, which currently have no voice. We don't impose intelligence tests on voters. We go on the assumption that somehow, the wisdom of crowds will make up for individual failings. But we're excluding millions of people from that, and they might well make the difference.
    - wat10000 22d ago
      “On both ends”? Who has an upper age limit?
- undersuit 23d ago
  I think the 3 ideas I mentioned above are helpful nudges to reduce incumbency. There are other ways, like Australia's mandatory voting, or the DSA's Abolish the Senate proposal that we're less ready for.
  - jmward01 23d ago
    My final argument about term limits actually is news today. Politicians will throw out democracy to stay in power by disenfranchising people. You want to stay in power? Just make sure the other side can't vote. Use your authority to block them getting ballots. Put a poll tax on them. Arrest them then take their vote because you arrested them. Or, just don't deliver their mail because your side decided they aren't properly registered. We need checks on these people that force them out. I will take occasionally having a good one not serve quite long enough for the other 99% to be tossed out before they can take the whole system down. Historically only death pushes the worst ones out. That will always be true unless we put term limits in place to force them out another way.
    - undersuit 23d ago
      >We need checks on these people that force them out. So you're going to vote for checks on these people but you're not going to vote them out?
      - jmward01 23d ago
        I do both and I get involved locally. There isn't one magic solution. Some make more difference than others.
        undersuit 23d ago
        Term limits isn't going to get a better candidate, voting for the better candidate would.