After reading the article "The Vulnerable American Politician," I decided to post this blog questioning the length of term of the members of the House of Representatives.
When the House was initially put together, it was debated that the election of the members should be annually, but also Madison argued the elections should be held every three years. The annual election was though to deter the chance of "tyranny." Delegates ultimately split the difference and the 2 year terms were enacted.
Two year elections are argued as too short for many reasons:
-The "long view" or forecast, is absent in the term due to the fact that politician want something to show for their term. Short term issues are delt with in order to make progress instead of solving or voting bill for a larger issue.
-House members are continuously campaigning. As soon as they reach office, they have another election to prepare for.
-House members have difficulty challenging popularity because it risks voter loyalty, but are expected to face issues that are unpleasant such as crime or tax policy. The short time increment does allow public popularity to rise in time for an election.
-The constant campaigning sometimes turns people off, giving the vast majority of House members(nearly 90%) re-election due to lack of electoral competition.
Could longer terms fix some of these problems or create more problems within Congress?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The only problem I see is that no matter how long you make the term, the election is always going to be on their minds. In order to make changes to the Constitution, I think we should have an overwhelming interest and overwhelming evidence that the change will meet our interest. I do not think doubling or tripling the time in office will make enough changes to warrant an Amendment to the Consitution. But good question!
I believe that longer terms will be harmful to voters. Longer terms will mean less government accountability. If the Representative has time to make up for unpopular decisions that occurred early in the term, then the people may not hold them responsible for them. I like short terms in at least one chamber because then I can vote to change direction if need be. Every Representative that takes office is well aware of the busy campaigning that will take place.
I do think the two year term limit for members of the house is too short and that it probably does cause certain problems. With the two year limit representatives really don’t get a chance to implement long term plans because they have to worry about the here and now. They have to have results fast so the voters see a reason to reelect them. Also since there is only a two year limit these congressmen basically have to start worrying about their next campaign which means taking time away from their ability to try and enact legislation. So giving them a longer term might help them to be better representatives. However I do not know if the change would be enough to warrant changing the term limit we already have. So overall I would say just keep it the same for now.
Post a Comment