Should Senators have term limites?

[Governor PiT]

I would say instead of term limites, they should be up for re-ection every 2 years like the House, insted of every 6 years.

[Soaring Eagle]

No. In fact I don't think Presidents should have term limits either. Let the people speak.

[Conan]

No. Why? Ted Kennedy

[Verily]

I could agree with requiring Senators to only serve non-consecutive terms. However, I think the bigger issue is in the House, where the worst corruption occurs (mostly due to gerrymandering making incumbents impossible to unseat). Of course, the more obvious solution is to mandate nationwide nonpartisan redistricting as Iowa and Minnesota (and maybe elsewhere, idk) have.

[ottermax]

Here's a crazy idea:

How about if after a senator has served... say, 6 terms, that their party can't fund their race, just to see if the senator is popular enough to be elected again. Other similar obstacles would help bring changes to the senate.

I like the idea of having termless senators and representatives, but I like having terms on presidents. While the president has complete power over his branch of government, a senator is really just 1% of their part of congress and a representative is only 1 out of 435.

I could agree with requiring Senators to only serve non-consecutive terms. However, I think the bigger issue is in the House, where the worst corruption occurs (mostly due to gerrymandering making incumbents impossible to unseat). Of course, the more obvious solution is to mandate nationwide nonpartisan redistricting as Iowa and Minnesota (and maybe elsewhere, idk) have.

We need nonpartisan districting everywhere. Look at the districts in California, and in most of the nation, it's ridiculous.

[Angel of Death]

I'm in favor of electing the whole Senate simultaneously. Of course, 6 years is a long time between any Senate election, so let's make the term last only 4 years and then make the elections occur in the middle of a Presidential term for a nice contrast of temporal preferences of the electorate.

[The Vorlon]

We have term limits - they are called "elections" - A senator gets elected to a term with a 6 year limit, and if enough voters approve of his/her performance they can get another 6 year limit

The real issue is not Senators (and Congressman as well) sticking around too long, it's the vast Gerrymandering in the House, and the huge structural advantages incumbants of both parties have built into the system to vastly improve their own odds for election.

Term limits is like giving somebody an aspirin for a broken leg - It may dull the pain, but it doesn't address the real issue.

Dems => 234
GOP => 201

Senate = 49-49-2

Note - I actually changed the Senate to 50/48/2 on Election - I was afraid Conrad Burns must actually get re-elected - Glad I was wrong

[Downwinder]

I support the current term structure, but I would be willing to impose a limit of two consecutive terms on all officials elected under the constitution, including the president.

I cannot agree enough on the need for nationwide non-partisan redistricting though; something fundamental about our 'democracy' is broken when seats are drawn for the advantage of political parties, race, etc.  And with non-partisan redistricting, we'd increase the number of swing districts, and decrease some of the power of incumbency. 

[True Democrat]

No. In fact I don't think Presidents should have term limits either. Let the people speak.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think the people should be allowed to elect any voter to any office for any amount of terms (yes, that means lower the minimum age for all offices to 18).