Do you like Rand Paul's idea of limiting congressional terms.....?

No,I do not agree with Paul Rand's any ideas except the congressional term limits for Senate and Congress.

More to the point we need to limit the money. At this point you can limit terms all you want. The replacement will be the 'next in line' if he/she has the big corporate cash behind him or her. Wealth has purchased our republic by buying up our democratic process. There's no going back at this point...unless we actually DO go back, and there's no power block with the mojo to make that happen. The public just doesn't see it. Why? The press has been co-opted because big corporations own ALL of the outlets, or soon will... print, radio, television and a big chunk of the internet and leave no room for any reality except corporate reality. Anyone who says different is a 'commie', a socialist or worse, 'a liberal'!

Rand is a part of the GOP/Tea/Fox/Jesus party. If he's not 110% on board with the retro policies and politics of this right wing, corporate sponsored junta, he's going nowhere. That applies to ALL of the current characters running or soon to be running. Term limits are not going to raise anyone's wages, they won't move this country toward world class affordable education, affordable HEALTH INSURANCE, or decent old age pensions for 95% of us that work for hourly wages. Term limits? Meet the new boss...same as the old boss!

Yes I Like Rand Paul's idea of limiting congressional terms.

Yes-- to limit the effects of voters on my decisions its best if I am not even able to run twice for the same office.

When I do what voters want--

I'm history anyway,

so nobody can elect a senator with a track record they can trust-

We get business interests back in control-

EVERYONE is up for election once only!

We take BACK the country from these voters who are mainly uneducated low wage thugs.

I like Rand Paul's idea of limiting Congressional terms!

GET RID OF THEM ALL- RANDOMIZE the CONGRESS!

The Founding fathers did not want long terms for representatives. They considered it an honor to work for the country a few years then went back to their lives. It's a good idea to limit terms if for no other reason than to limit the considerable power these people accrue during their terms. Regardless, I believe it would now take a constitutional amendment to make the change. Something the President cannot do without a vote through the house & senate. Though possibly he could try and have it put on the ballot for a public vote. That would get interesting..

I do not agree with Paul Rand's any ideas except the congressional term limits for Senate and Congress. The only people who do not like term limits are the senators and congressmen. We have term limit for the presidents, then what's wrong having term limits for senators and congressmen? We definitively need term limits so new faces and fresh ideas can make us more competitive with the rest of the world.

Actually wouldn't be so bad of an idea if you look at this wikipedia list of Senators ranked by age. It's ridiculous how old they all are, not very reflective of the American people, especially for younger generations under the age of 50.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_Unite...

I mean seriously, 15 out of 100 senators are under 50. Something is wrong with this picture.

Also congressional terms will help reduce issues with seniority - you serve a longer time, you get a better position in appropriations, then take home more bacon for your constituents. Think about how long Robert Byrd was chairman of appropriations.

Sure. But he doesn't have the power to make that happen and even if he were the president he still wouldn't have that power. So, it's talk. I like the idea of world peace too but would you honestly vote for a candidate that made that their platform? I generally respect Rand Paul but if he is promising term limits than maybe my respect was misplaced. He might as well promise that he will end crime and cure cancer because he has about the same chance of pulling those off as creating term limits.

It would take a law passed by Congress or an amendment to the US Constitution to enforce term limits. A president doesn't have that power or they would have used it ages ago and Congress isn't likely to vote themselves out of a job either.

No. Rand Paul especially should not like this because it is against the intention of the Founders. Limiting any kind of term means that the people of the United States do not get to choose from the best qualified candidates. If a Congressman is doing a great job, why should he have to leave. Instead of limiting terms, how about working to make people more engaged in the political process so they choose the best and most realistic candidate, not the one slinging feel good messages?

More to the point we need to limit the money. At this point you can limit terms all you want. The replacement will be the 'next in line' if he/she has the big corporate cash behind him or her. Wealth has purchased our republic by buying up our democratic process. There's no going back at this point...unless we actually DO go back, and there's no power block with the mojo to make that happen. The public just doesn't see it. Why? The press has been co-opted because big corporations own ALL of the outlets, or soon will... print, radio, television and a big chunk of the internet and leave no room for any reality except corporate reality. Anyone who says different is a 'commie', a socialist or worse, 'a liberal'!