Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Legislative Term Limits for NC General Assembly

  1. #1
    une plume de Libertée GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Youngsville, NC
    Posts
    23,175
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default Legislative Term Limits for NC General Assembly

    Originally envisioned in 2011 as a Constitutional Amendment, I am going to propose it for 2012 as a regular statute given that the 3/4 vote is unobtainable in the 6 weeks of the short session.

    It is an unusual term limits bill. If someone is really, really good, they could actually serve for 20 years. Here is the text:

    “Sec. 25. Limitation of consecutive terms.

    (1) No person shall be eligible for election to more than three consecutive terms as a member of the House of Representatives, nor be eligible for election to more than five consecutive terms as a member of the Senate. If a person fills a vacancy, it shall be considered as election to a term for the purpose of this section if the person takes office during the first calendar year of the term.


    (2) Terms of office beginning before January 1, 2013, shall not be considered for the purpose of this section.


    (3) A person disqualified by this section from election to the next succeeding term as a member of the House of Representatives may not fill a vacancy in that body in the succeeding term. A person disqualified by this section from election to the next succeeding term as a member of the Senate may not fill a vacancy in that body in the succeeding term.


    (4) This section does not make eligible for office a person disqualified from office under Section 26 of this Article."


    “Sec. 26. Limitation of terms.


    (1) No person shall be eligible for election to more than five terms as a member of the House of Representatives, nor be eligible for election to more than seven terms as a member of the Senate. If a person fills a vacancy, it shall be considered as election to a term for the purpose of this section if the person takes office during the first calendar year of the term.


    (2) Terms of office beginning before January 1, 2013, shall not be considered for the purpose of this section.


    (3) A person disqualified by this section from service as a member of the House of Representatives may not fill a vacancy in that body. A person disqualified by this section from service as a member of the Senate may not fill a vacancy in that body."



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    une plume de Libertée GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Youngsville, NC
    Posts
    23,175
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    I am think of changing it so that both House and Senate read "three consecutive, five nonconsecutive" with no difference between the two houses.

  4. #3

    Default

    That's GunnyFreedom! One man attempting to do more for the residents of N.C. in one term than hundreds of others in multiple terms combined.
    Something, something, something...Whatever my rage for the day.

  5. #4
    une plume de Libertée GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Youngsville, NC
    Posts
    23,175
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    LOL thanks Phil,

    This would clearly work better as a Constitutional Amendment than as a regular statute, but clearing the 3/4 hurdle will be about impossible. Therefore I will go with the simple majority and introduce it as a statute. Once the statute is proven effective, then maybe we can promote it to a Constitutional Amendment.

  6. #5

    Default

    I think that would be the wisest way to go about it. Then again the way things have played out for you perhaps introduce it as an amendment. Then after it is shot down a GOPer will just re-word it slightly and get the credit for introducing a new statute limiting term limits.
    Once you have it sussed out post what you have and I will social network it to those I know.
    Something, something, something...Whatever my rage for the day.

  7. #6
    Member Voluntary Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    everywhere & nowhere, but always here: Union of Soviet America
    Posts
    1,519
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I think you should propose a bill limiting terms to 0. Then, graciously accept your opponents' 1 term counter offer as a reluctant compromise.
    Last edited by Voluntary Man; 02-22-2012 at 02:03 PM.

  8. #7
    une plume de Libertée GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Youngsville, NC
    Posts
    23,175
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    It's going to be an amendment for the November ballot. Apparently the Supreme Court has ruled somewhere that term limits have to be amendments. And the wording will be three consecutive or 5 nonconsecutive terms for BOTH houses.

    I know the form is unusual, but I think it works to allow seniority while preventing entrenchment.

  9. #8
    une plume de Libertée GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Youngsville, NC
    Posts
    23,175
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntary Man View Post
    I think you should propose a bill limiting terms to 0. Then, graciously accept your opponents' 1 term counter offer as a reluctant compromise.
    LOL don't I wish.

  10. #9

    Default

    I don't think I've ever seen the consecutive term limit anywhere outside of Mexico before (oh and Russia for president). In Mexico you can't serve consecutive terms in Congress. There's no term limits overall, but if you serve one term, you can't run for reelection for the next session. There's no reelection at all for Governor and President, as is typical in Latin America.

  11. #10
    une plume de Libertée GunnyFreedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Youngsville, NC
    Posts
    23,175
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Wow, and here I thought I had come up with something genuinely new. Mind you, saying three consecutive or five nonconsecutive is a bit different than 'no consecutive.' And I doubt I'll be citing Mexico and Russia as a precedent, as that would not be helpful.





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •