Public Policy Matters
Rational Public Policy with Common Sense requires a well informed and engaged public. Apathy and indifference won't keep us safe or secure.
June 28, 2025
Rational Public Policy with Common Sense requires a well informed and engaged public. Apathy and indifference won't keep us safe or secure.
June 28, 2025
Related Discussion - Addressing Institutional Corruption
Term Limits
continue >>>
continue >>>
Home | Contact Us | Screen Test
Copyright (c) 2009-2024
Are you part of the problem?
News Matters
Home | Contact Us | PBR Development
Copyright (c) 2009-2025
Term Limits
continue >>>
A large percentage of each congressman or senator's time and attention, and political budget, while in office, is devoted to re-election. Chances for re-election are profoundly influenced by party support for a candidate's re-election.
Accordingly, if the politician expects to be re-elected (most do) his chances for re-election become a bargaining chip with which he can be threatened and pressured, by his party, by his corporate sponsors, or even by his constituency. All must be considered with each vote. Such considerations, naturally, will have a significant impact on each vote.
It is not only conceivable, but most assuredly the case, that politicians regularly find themselves in a moral, ethical, and political dilemma of having to choose between casting the vote that is most likely to result in re-election, or the vote that the politician sincerely believes to be in the best interest of his constituents and the nation, all things considered and weighed in the balance.
If the chance of re-election were simply eliminated by legislated limits to one term, virtually all of the aforementioned dynamics and considerations would be eliminated. It can be reasonably argued, then, that his voting choice will rest more squarely on his best judgment of the matters at hand, without consideration of the other pressures.
We invite responsible and respectful contributions to this discussion.
(return to related question)
(related canonizer camp)
Accordingly, if the politician expects to be re-elected (most do) his chances for re-election become a bargaining chip with which he can be threatened and pressured, by his party, by his corporate sponsors, or even by his constituency. All must be considered with each vote. Such considerations, naturally, will have a significant impact on each vote.
It is not only conceivable, but most assuredly the case, that politicians regularly find themselves in a moral, ethical, and political dilemma of having to choose between casting the vote that is most likely to result in re-election, or the vote that the politician sincerely believes to be in the best interest of his constituents and the nation, all things considered and weighed in the balance.
If the chance of re-election were simply eliminated by legislated limits to one term, virtually all of the aforementioned dynamics and considerations would be eliminated. It can be reasonably argued, then, that his voting choice will rest more squarely on his best judgment of the matters at hand, without consideration of the other pressures.
We invite responsible and respectful contributions to this discussion.
(return to related question)
(related canonizer camp)
continue >>>
Home | Contact Us | Screen Test
Copyright (c) 2009-2024
Are you part of the problem?
News Matters
Home | Contact Us | PBR Development
Copyright (c) 2009-2025