• radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’d support a four-term limit for the Senate,six-term limit for the House, and one term in the Supreme Court for a period of time not to exceed 20 years.

    • Makhno@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Shit I’d go even lower. Gotta be young enough to have some skin in the game when it comes to the consequences of legislation, etc.

      • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Fair enough, you’re less likely to vote for shit policies if you know that you’re going to be living with them. And even if you do vote for shit policies and end up living with them, it was entirely your damn fault. And you just brought it on yourself.

  • HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    certainly. even lower. Some people can be vigorous in their seventies but they are not the majority, 50’s many go down. That is one problem with raising the retirement age in general. There is only a subset that can keep working as age goes up.

  • Fester@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    First I would support campaign finance reform and watch 90% of the problems be solved.

    Then I would tackle the other 10% by making voting more accessible - especially in primaries. Make it so accessible that even young voters bother to do it. That way people will choose younger reps more often.

    So no, I wouldn’t support putting a bandaid on one issue and ignoring the root causes.

    • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Should make voting a week long thing so people have more time to go. The last day should be a national holiday.

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I support this Pipe Dream.

    Unfortunately, this isn’t a Congress that will vote to limit its own power.

  • Beebabe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes, because of the risk of elder abuse. And just being absolutely out of touch with the general population.

  • notaviking@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Not an American but if you should have and every country should have a minimum age, like 21 because of mental and physical maturity, and a maximum age like 75, because of the risk of possible stamina and mental decline.

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Mandatory? No. Customary? YES.

    There are plenty of people who are cogent, thoughtful, insightful, and able to use their years of experience to see solutions or consequences someone younger might not.

    But the custom and usual practice needs to be for congresspersons to mentor the newbies so they can be successful, then get the hell out of the way.

  • CrazyLikeGollum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    No, because 75 is too old. I’d support an age limit of 65. I’d also support a minimum age of 25 for the House/Senate and 35 for the Supreme Court.

    I’d also like to see term limits imposed on the house, senate, and Supreme Court. As well as a limit on the total amount of time a judge can serve as a judge in the federal court system.