Citizens United NOT term limits

[4bonhoffer]

Just watched some republican corporate tool pushing the term limits crap on Face the nation.

We already have term limits. They are called elections! Term limits are corporations wet dreams. They can just dump money into the tool of their choice to maintain power. Ending Citizens United and getting money out of politics will go much further in making congress work than term limits. If you have any “conservatives” in your orbit please repeat this to them, over and over and over………

[yankee87]

1. Increase the number of SCOTUS

There is no reason not to have 3 SCOTUS judges for each region. Or increase the number of regions and add that number of justices.

[Midnight Writer]

4. I think every President should get two SCOTUS picks per term.

I would love to see 100 Supreme Court Justices.

That way, every pick would not be like slapping a landmine to see if it goes off. An individual Justice would have his personal power diluted, so that cranks like Alito or crooks like Thomas would have little impact on the overall functioning of the Court. Their votes would just be one out of a hundred.

It would defang the special interest groups buying our Justices, because buying 50 or more Justices over the course of decades is just not as effective as buying 6 Justices over a few years. You can find 5 crank judges to make a ruling like Citizens United, but could you find 51? Perhaps, but less likely.

100 Justices would also make the Court more responsive to the changes in our electorate and the will of the people. A two-term President would be guaranteed four picks, plus any picks that mat occur through attrition. A single President would not be able to turn the Court on its heels, but would get picks that would reflect the values of President.

Would we rather see our futures determined by 5 crank judges picked by a single unhinged President, or by 50+ judges picked through the years by a variety of Presidents?

[Bettie]

14. That way too, cases could be decided

by panels of justices randomly chosen and they could hear more cases per year.

And it's a lot harder to tailor your argument for a particular judge when you don't know if they will be on your case.

[misanthrope]

6. One SCOTUS per circuit is reasonable

Anything larger might be unwieldy.

[rickford66]

2. Since the GOP etal wants a corporation treated as a person

it should have a lifespan. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the concept of corporations was invented, didn't they have a lifespan and then the value was divvied up by the stockholders at the end of the lifespan.

[stopdiggin]

3. agreed 100%. 'term limits' is a simple minded nostrum

most often drug out by those have little real interest in (or understanding of) politics.

A fast moving game of musical chairs does nothing to enhance the democratic process.
Well vetted candidates, and a well informed populous does ...

[drmeow]

5. IMO

Term limits are fundamentally undemocratic.

[misanthrope]

8. So you don't like the 22nd Amendment?

Just saying.

[drmeow]

10. The undemocratic nature

of the 22nd Amendment is offset by the its means to protect against a monarchy/dictatorship (which may not work with Trump!).

But nice try!

[Mysterian]

9. So is an incumbent using their power as an advantage

Reality: Incumbents get free media attention and have a definite advantage when seeking election. Power corrupts. Incumbents gain more and more power the longer they stay in office.

[drmeow]

11. I don't disagree with that

but there are more democratic ways to counter that then term limits.

[Mysterian]

13. Please share

What are some better ideas?

[Mysterian]

7. Incumbents gain too much of an advantage

Term limits too.

[Uncle Joe]

12. Term limits is just another way of taking choice away from the American people, get rid of the money monopoly dynamic,

and not experienced political leaders on account of some arbitrary time limit.

Eliminate Citizens United, move toward public financing of elections and proportional voting.

Thanks for the thread 4bonhoffer.

[Bettie]

15. I can see both sides of this argument

First, I absolutely think that we need to get rid of Citizens United and the ability for congresscritters to trade individual stocks.

Curtail lobbying significantly. We don't need congress owned by Wall Street, Fossil Fuels, Banks, Tech, and others. We don't need lobbyists for foreign nations interfering in our elections.

Those things will get some out of office, simply because they could no longer use their position to do insider trading and increase their personal wealth.

But term limits...I can see the logic of arguments both for and against them. I mean, Chuck Grassley has been in office since 1980. I am 59 years old, I was just starting high school then.

Maybe, if we could get the BIG money out and let candidates be themselves rather than trying to become whatever the consultants tell them to be, things would probably improve a lot.