How do most feel about limiting terms for house and senate seats?

Question

Maybe not as short as say the presidency. I think what made this country strong in the beginning was new ideas and ways of doing things. Say maybe like 12 years in either the house or senate and then you must step down.

Answer 1

pros: douchebags get out quicker.

cons: gotta deal with more idiotic election seasons.

Answer 2

It's an excellent idea.  We were never intended to have professional politicians.  Term limits would automatically limit the power of each individual member of Congress, which limits how much power Congress has, which is a good thing.  We might even get the obscene retirement benefits eliminated.

Also, with term limits, the influence of lobbyists would be reduced.  

While we're at it, lets limit them to 6 months per year in D.C., the other 6 months they have to be back in their own districts.

I'd give them one 6 year term in the Senate, one 6 year term in the House, with no crossover unless they go home for 6 years in between.  In other words, NOBODY runs for reelection.

Now watch, somebody will come along and whine that we'll lose all that valuable experience!  Hogwash.  The only experience they get is experience in corruption.

Answer 3

Have to change the Constitution.  Almost impossible

Answer 4

I think it's smart, and it SHOULD be as short as the Presidency. If a senator or rep knew their time was limited, maybe they might act in their state's interest, and that of the country, for a change. Someone once said, "We have term limits; they're called elections," but with the corruption of the electoral process now, that's not realistic.