Ron Paul on term limits

[Southern Man]

My friend claims that despite Paul's support for term limits, he has yet to term-limit himself and thus he's hypocritical on that issue.

Is this an act of hypocrisy or does Paul have an explanation for why he has served so many terms despite supporting term limits?

[low preference guy]

No, it's not hypocritical.

If the good guys term-limit themselves, the good guys come home and the bad guys stay. Term limits work only if they apply to everyone.

Ron Paul has voted for every term limits bill that came across him.

[pblumel]

Low Preference has it just right.

Ron -- and his son, Rand -- both support term limits for the entire body. Neither one has made a self-limit pledge, so they haven't contradicted themselves or acted in a hypocritical manner. But both support term limits and their support is genuine. Ron was one of the earliest modern supporters of term limits, sponsoring bills in the early 1980s! One of Rand's first acts as a senator was to sign on as cosponsor of Sen. David Vitter's (R-LA) term limits amendment.

For more info, see: http://pblumel.blogspot.com/2008/11/ron-paul-i-support-term-limits.html

To sign an online petition for Congressional term limits, go here:
http://www.termlimits.org/content.asp?admin=Y&contentid=28

[Peek a Boo]

This is one issue that i hafta disagree with RP on: I've seen firsthand the political engineering that goes on with 'term limits'-- the incumbents and establishment simply have a handpicked person that they wrangle support for, and you're back to The System.

Term limits undermine the will of the people. I do think that addressing election fraud would go a long way to seeing destructive incumbents legitimately voted out. Kinda like RP's position on illegal immigration: address the ROOT of the problem instead of a bandaid solution. As Ron Paul has demonstrated, it's not being in office for forty years that is the problem.....it's the people who gain office w/ corrupt means and continue the corruption. :(

[Zippyjuan]

It can take time and experience to aquire the skills to craft a good bill on something and be able to get it passed. If you have term limits, it is less likely that a person will aquire those skills. If they are not allowed the time to do that, then elected polititians will have to rely on (and surrender more power to) either experienced carreer staffers (not elected) or lobbyists who will tell them what to put in bills (or even write them for them). This is not to mention the loss of choice if a good person gets into office and is forced to leave. If we had term limits now, Ron Paul would be out of Congress and perhaps out of policics altogether.

[John F Kennedy III]

I'm against term limits. If the voters want to elect someone to 20 terms that's their choice.

[Ashhhhh]

I'm against term limits

[Tod]

Enacting mandatory term limits takes away the voters' freedom to determine whether a politician needs to be term-limited.

The BIG question is how to eliminate the corruption? Recently there was an article about how much the freshman tea-party congressmen have raked in so far.

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/11/18/7445/15-tea-party-caucus-freshmen-rake-35-million-first-9-months-washington?utm_source=iwatchnews&utm_medium=site-features&utm_campaign=topics-drawer

[Feelgood]

I'm against term limits. If the voters want to elect someone to 20 terms that's their choice.

20 terms of Clinton or Bush or Obama? No thanks!

[heavenlyboy34]

It can take time and experience to aquire the skills to craft a good bill on something and be able to get it passed. If you have term limits, it is less likely that a person will aquire those skills. If they are not allowed the time to do that, then elected polititians will have to rely on (and surrender more power to) either experienced carreer staffers (not elected) or lobbyists who will tell them what to put in bills (or even write them for them). This is not to mention the loss of choice if a good person gets into office and is forced to leave. If we had term limits now, Ron Paul would be out of Congress and perhaps out of policics altogether.
If term limits were in place, couldn't someone just sit out one term and then run again 2 years/1 term later (and spend his "off term" criticizing the incumbent)? /curious

[heavenlyboy34]

Enacting mandatory term limits takes away the voters' freedom to determine whether a politician needs to be term-limited.

The BIG question is how to eliminate the corruption? Recently there was an article about how much the freshman tea-party congressmen have raked in so far.

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/11/18/7445/15-tea-party-caucus-freshmen-rake-35-million-first-9-months-washington?utm_source=iwatchnews&utm_medium=site-features&utm_campaign=topics-drawer
Would you argue that the 2 term limit on the presidency should be repealed?

[Peek a Boo]

Would you argue that the 2 term limit on the presidency should be repealed?

I think it would be an easy argument to make. :)

But only after we've cleaned out the problems with our election fraud, monetary system, and dumped welfare/ IRS/ FED/ UN.

[VIDEODROME]

Could the country just hold a periodic vote of "Confidence" or "No Confidence"? Sort of voting on whether we think we need an election?

I mean what if we get someone in there who is good and gaining valuable experience? Maybe we could vote to just keep them going and skip the election and the campaigns that waste time and money?

[seapilot]

I used to think term limits would be a check on power, but now I am not so sure with the duopoly party system set up.

How about liar limits? Pass a rule if a politician is caught deliberately lying to public while holding a public position they are out (without benefits). Now a days there is video in every phone to record. It would be politically poison to vote against a Liar's limit bill.

[heavenlyboy34]

I used to think term limits would be a check on power, but now I am not so sure with the duopoly party system set up.

How about liar limits? Pass a rule if a politician is caught deliberately lying to public while holding a public position they are out (without benefits). Now a days there is video in every phone to record. It would be politically poison to vote against a Liar's limit bill.
lulz...problem with that is that Boobus LIKES to be lied to-as long as it's a bunch of feel-good lies. It happens even on these forums. :(

[amartin315]

i think it would be good to term limit the senate, but not the house. in the house they don't seem to have as much trouble with long term congressmen