We desperately need reasonable term limits for congress
I’m more and more convinced there are no good arguments against reasonable term limits for congress.
I just read about the most recent member of congress having a somewhat age-related incident. This was Virginia Foxx. She has been in congress for 20 years and is 81 years old. Just recently we’ve had Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, and Diane Feinstein, all have age related incidents that affected their ability to perform.
My representative is Gerry Connolly who is 74 years old with cancer. I’ve voted for Connolly every time he ran. I don’t have a problem with Connolly, but I don’t know what I’m missing either because no democrat will challenge him in a primary. I don’t really get a chance to see what my options are until he chooses to stop running.
The arguments I’ve heard against term limits are things like, it takes power away from voters, it could diminish competency of congress, it could artificially cut short the tenure of beloved figures, and it wouldn’t really reduce corruption.
While some of these things may have some validity, I think they are all bad arguments when the current system has no term limits.
I could take the arguments against term limits one by one, but the glaring problem with all these arguments is I see no systemic benefit of allowing any person to be in the same position of power indefinitely.
When the arguments against term limits are brought up, I think they are made without specifying a specific duration. There is a difference in a term limit of 4 years versus 16 years. Meaning you could pick very generous conservative term limits if you are worried about competency or turnover.
But let’s be real. Over the last 40 years, how many elected officials would you say have been exceptional representatives of their constituents, or have some kind of irreplaceable skill?
When you build systems, you want those systems to facilitate behavior that aligns with your goals. I think one of the highest priorities of democracy is for elected officials to reflect the will of the people.
By repeatedly sending the same representatives we miss a good opportunity for voters to express their needs. We just saw this when democrats didn’t have a true primary. The primary process allows candidates to have a conversation with the voters. Without that process elected officials become detached from the people they represent.
By forcing some turnover it allows voters and representatives to reengage. This creates a natural interval for our governing system to realign itself.
I don’t think this just applies to congress. Imagine if we did the same with the judiciary. Do we really need lifetime appointments? I understand the goal of giving judges some insulation against political concerns but is a lifetime appointment necessary to accomplish this? We couldn’t do the same with say, a 20-year appointment.
Wouldn’t that make the supreme court appointments saner? That way you could predict when spots open, and they would open consistently so one president doesn’t have too much influence over the court by luck.
Maybe this isn’t the biggest problem in the world, but it seems like an obvious one that we should be able to fix. And who knows? Maybe this is causing more issues than we think. You really don’t know how these things can affect the system until you put the rules in place.
Welcome to your Breaking Points Premium subscription!
With your support you'll get access to our AMAs, full ad free shows in your inbox every morning, the premium exclusive second half of every Friday show, and more!
Here are some helpful resources to get you started with your subscription:
Connect BP to your Podcast Player: https://support.locals.com/en/article/what-is-rss-and-how-do-i-use-it-ekrqi/
Connect BP to your Spotify: https://support.locals.com/en/article/connecting-to-spotify-dtbjpj/?bust=1745352886430
Account/Billing/Tech Support: http://breakingpoints.locals.com/contact
We're so grateful for your support and trust as you join us on our journey to create better independent media.
- BP Team
Thank you for becoming a member at Breaking Points, now on Locals!
You will get access to all the exclusive content, our full length shows, and new Q&A live streams that will be on Locals. Locals adds great features to the show such as the mobile app, higher quality video, and screen casting to your TV!
If you need any help, please contact [email protected].
Thanks for being a part of the next step in our independent media journey,
BP Team
Krystal, Ryan and Emily discuss China calling Trump's bluff on tariffs, stock market reacts, and a lawyer for a wrongly deported man responds to JD Vance.
YouTube: https://youtu.be/5aaiNVuR134
Spotify Link: https://open.spotify.com/show/2togMvVQ0F4mXQmbwuFs4K?si=wEARUQEoSR2o4KFxn-wR4w
Timestamps:
(00:00)Introduction and Overview of Liberation Day
(2:25)Jobs Report Analysis and Economic Implications
(14:58)The Impact of Tariffs on Domestic Economy
(26:15)Trump's Economic Strategy and Its Consequences
(40:55)The Autocratic Leadership Style of Trump
(42:19)The Case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia
(1:12:02)The Shift in Democratic Leadership Dynamics
(1:17:53)Upcoming Nationwide Protests Against Trump
(1:33:45)End Of Show
If you need any help, please contact http://breakingpoints.locals.com/contact
To connect your RSS feed, use this link: https://breakingpoints.locals.com/rss
Re: today's show approx 1:05:00:
Saagar I really hope you read these posts, man. As a leftist, I wouldn't EVER cheer your death. AND I HOPE THATS MOT WHAT YOU TAKE AWAY FROM KIRKS DEATH.
The last 3 years you've given me more to think about, ponder and have challenged my beliefs in more than any other conservative political pundit whose content I've ever consumed. I believe you approach MOST topics in good faith, and in objective reality. I don't always arrive in agreement with you but you've challenged my views and values in ways no one else has-and I am very grateful and thankful to for you for that. Bong rips for Saagar and his baby!
Saagar please don't think you and Charlie Kirk are comparable. Saagar even in moments when I disagree I have always believed you have journalistic integrity and empathy. You have always held yourself to a high and consistent moral standard. I will continue to support and look forward to hearing your thoughtful, respectful, and well-researched takes.
@BreakingPoints and for the community since nobody has talked about it directly,
Helldivers 2, which the CK shooter seems to reference with the inscribed arrows, is a deeply satirical shooter game that is a spiritual successor to Starship Troopers.
The game has players engage in an interplanetary war to defend "Super Earth" from alien bugs and robots, in which the governing body of Super Earth is clearly fascist and players are expendable helldivers who are sent to foreign planets on missions to do various things, but mostly clean up the mess of the governments experiments and other alien incursions.
However, the fun of the story aspect is that it is very tongue-in-cheek patriotic such that you are routinely told not to question things less you be deemed a traitor. You have to destroy radio towers that broadcast conspiratorial (factual) news, and you always get the sense that there's a deep well of fascist darkness just behind any question you may ask.
Since you are deployed on foreign planets, you ...
