Lets VOTE for a different party... ANTI-INCUMBANT!!!

[SadisticNature]

Canada has no term limits period. Not even for Prime-Minister. And it works very well. We've had good politicians have LONG runs. Lots of people disagree with the party in charge at any specific time, but at least they have their best and brightest leading them.

If you look at any of the recent 12-16 year spans of one party having the presidency, the 2nd guy is usually a LOT worse than the first, and you'd be a lot happier if the 1st guy was in for the whole time.

I also think a lot of the problem is the way your media covers your politics. It's become a sideshow, and people keep their jobs by scoring points against the other team rather than by passing good policy. Not sure there is any real solution to this one, its not like you can get the average voters to read the entire bills that people voted for/against along with their reasons for why.

[steelish]

The other option is to put Term Limits in, if a President is limited to 8 years in Office, then why not limit Representatives or Senators to say 2 Terms in office?
Many States have Term Limits for Governors, California is one I think of right off hand
Most are lawyers, let them go back to the Practice they left or get involved in their Communities and see Real LIfe from there

Just a thought

There used to be term limits for all of the elected positions. Over the years, states who were happy with their Representatives, Senators, Governors, extended limits or discontinued them. There was a reason limits were in place. Once the term was served, the elected officials had to then step down and live amongst the very people they represented. They had to live according to the taxes they set, the bills they passed, any changes they made to the way of life then applied to them as well. It made them think hard before passing bills/laws or making changes.

Elected officials do not live by the same "code" as the citizens. They have lifetime benefits which preclude them from any worries of health care, life insurance, dental, or even income! So why should they second guess a bill that will heavily tax citizens, or put them under a restrictive healthcare plan, or even cause more unemployment?

Canada has no term limits period. Not even for Prime-Minister. And it works very well. We've had good politicians have LONG runs. Lots of people disagree with the party in charge at any specific time, but at least they have their best and brightest leading them.

If you look at any of the recent 12-16 year spans of one party having the presidency, the 2nd guy is usually a LOT worse than the first, and you'd be a lot happier if the 1st guy was in for the whole time.

How lovely for Canada. It doesn't matter. We need to go back to our old system of one term for elected officials, along with doing away with their lifetime benefits.

I also think a lot of the problem is the way your media covers your politics. It's become a sideshow, and people keep their jobs by scoring points against the other team rather than by passing good policy. Not sure there is any real solution to this one, its not like you can get the average voters to read the entire bills that people voted for/against along with their reasons for why.

The media mostly covers what they are shown. The politicians turn it into a sideshow. Unfortunately, getting elected into politics has turned more into pointing out how bad the other guy is than showing how virtuous and honest a you are.

Also, most politicians don't read the bills they vote for! The ones that vote against a bill usually have a team of lawyers read it.

[SadisticNature]

There used to be term limits for all of the elected positions. Over the years, states who were happy with their Representatives, Senators, Governors, extended limits or discontinued them. There was a reason limits were in place. Once the term was served, the elected officials had to then step down and live amongst the very people they represented. They had to live according to the taxes they set, the bills they passed, any changes they made to the way of life then applied to them as well. It made them think hard before passing bills/laws or making changes.

Elected officials do not live by the same "code" as the citizens. They have lifetime benefits which preclude them from any worries of health care, life insurance, dental, or even income! So why should they second guess a bill that will heavily tax citizens, or put them under a restrictive healthcare plan, or even cause more unemployment?




How lovely for Canada. It doesn't matter. We need to go back to our old system of one term for elected officials, along with doing away with their lifetime benefits.



The media mostly covers what they are shown. The politicians turn it into a sideshow. Unfortunately, getting elected into politics has turned more into pointing out how bad the other guy is than showing how virtuous and honest a you are.

Also, most politicians don't read the bills they vote for! The ones that vote against a bill usually have a team of lawyers read it.

There is a very simple fix: If you don`t like them, vote them out. If they are doing that bad a job it shouldn`t be hard to find a candidate to beat them.

Regarding the comments about Canada, my point is at least one successful system does not use term limits.

I personally think having length one term limits would be an absolute disaster, because candidates would be elected based on ideology over substance. Anyone with a track record in office would not be eligible to be elected.

This means if an ideology sounds appealing but doesn`t work in practice, candidates can run on that ideology endlessly and blame the failings on previous candidates getting details wrong.

I mean if finance minister were an elected position almost no one would vote Greenspan right now.

Also isn`t one of the biggest problems with politicians lying? If they never have to run for re-election how do you ever trust them to tell the truth. People who run for election could easily say whatever it takes to get elected, then do whatever they feel like while they are there. Right now people who do that can be voted out next term, term limits (of 1 election) eliminate that.

[DuncanONeil]

The primary job of a member of Congress has become that once they are elected they put ALL their effort into getting re-elected!

Does not Canada have a Parliment?

Canada has no term limits period. Not even for Prime-Minister. And it works very well. We've had good politicians have LONG runs. Lots of people disagree with the party in charge at any specific time, but at least they have their best and brightest leading them.

If you look at any of the recent 12-16 year spans of one party having the presidency, the 2nd guy is usually a LOT worse than the first, and you'd be a lot happier if the 1st guy was in for the whole time.

I also think a lot of the problem is the way your media covers your politics. It's become a sideshow, and people keep their jobs by scoring points against the other team rather than by passing good policy. Not sure there is any real solution to this one, its not like you can get the average voters to read the entire bills that people voted for/against along with their reasons for why.

[SadisticNature]

The primary job of a member of Congress has become that once they are elected they put ALL their effort into getting re-elected!

Does not Canada have a Parliment?

Yes we have Parliament called the House of Commons modeled partially on the British system. And yes, people do work to getting re-elected, but as for putting all effort into getting re-elected I hardly think that is accurate.

For starters we have campaigning regulations that limit campaigning to a six week period before the election, rather than this silly primary thing where candidates spend 9 figures and take a year away from their elected jobs to campaign for president.

I know you're anti-regulation in general so you'll probably provide an excuse as to why this is a bad thing, but the fact is it works.

[steelish]

I know you're anti-regulation in general so you'll probably provide an excuse as to why this is a bad thing, but the fact is it works.

I certainly have nothing against the politicians regulating themselves...but I won't hold my breath that it will ever happen.

What I don't like is the government regulating private companies to the point where they are practically driven out of business.

[DuncanONeil]

Hear! Hear!
Cardiologist are being forced to close their private practice due to a huge payment reduction imposed by Medicare and the other regulations they must follow.

I certainly have nothing against the politicians regulating themselves...but I won't hold my breath that it will ever happen.

What I don't like is the government regulating private companies to the point where they are practically driven out of business.

[DuncanONeil]

The issue is not campaigning. It is fundrasing, which occurs year round. Some of which is paid for with votes.

By the by the last Presidential election ran for nearly two years. And the winner has yet to stop campaigning!!!

Yes we have Parliament called the House of Commons modeled partially on the British system. And yes, people do work to getting re-elected, but as for putting all effort into getting re-elected I hardly think that is accurate.

For starters we have campaigning regulations that limit campaigning to a six week period before the election, rather than this silly primary thing where candidates spend 9 figures and take a year away from their elected jobs to campaign for president.

I know you're anti-regulation in general so you'll probably provide an excuse as to why this is a bad thing, but the fact is it works.

[SadisticNature]

The issue is not campaigning. It is fundrasing, which occurs year round. Some of which is paid for with votes.

By the by the last Presidential election ran for nearly two years. And the winner has yet to stop campaigning!!!

The U.S. laws have huge problems with how much one can spend during a campaign. This makes fundraising for years and years (Basically the whole time one is in office) the lifeblood of a campaign.

In Canada, we have a lot of candidates that are highly successful who don't spend an excessive amount of time fund raising. In my current riding our current MP (Member of Parliament) is Olivia Chow of the NDP (New Democrats Party -> Basically Canada's most left wing serious party).

She manages to get out to community rallies, events, show up in parliament when its in session, help individuals in our community deal with issues like government improperly processing their UI (Unemployment Insurance), or other such issues. Before that I lived in a different riding, a seat that was held by Ken Dryden (A Liberal -> Canada's main centrist party), who had a similar track record.

Many of my friends have lived in ridings (I think you guys call these congressional districts) where the Conservative Party of Canada (our right wing party) has a seat and attest that the candidates have similar track records.

In short, for the most part our politicians attend to their responsibilities both in parliament and in the communities which they represent. And a lot of this is that they don't have to run elitist expensive fundraisers as often as possible to ensure re-election.

[DuncanONeil]

How long is Parliament in session?

The U.S. laws have huge problems with how much one can spend during a campaign. This makes fundraising for years and years (Basically the whole time one is in office) the lifeblood of a campaign.

In Canada, we have a lot of candidates that are highly successful who don't spend an excessive amount of time fund raising. In my current riding our current MP (Member of Parliament) is Olivia Chow of the NDP (New Democrats Party -> Basically Canada's most left wing serious party).

She manages to get out to community rallies, events, show up in parliament when its in session, help individuals in our community deal with issues like government improperly processing their UI (Unemployment Insurance), or other such issues. Before that I lived in a different riding, a seat that was held by Ken Dryden (A Liberal -> Canada's main centrist party), who had a similar track record.

Many of my friends have lived in ridings (I think you guys call these congressional districts) where the Conservative Party of Canada (our right wing party) has a seat and attest that the candidates have similar track records.

In short, for the most part our politicians attend to their responsibilities both in parliament and in the communities which they represent. And a lot of this is that they don't have to run elitist expensive fundraisers as often as possible to ensure re-election.

[SadisticNature]

How long is Parliament in session?

Our parliament is in session long enough to address the changes in law the level of government needs to make. Parliament is far from the only job our elected representatives have, and they need to balance those other responsibilities.