DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**zatronanec** · 11-16-2005, 01:08 AM

I agree that term limits sound good, but ultimately, they are anti-democratic by attempting to thwart the will of the people to choose the representative of their choice.

Term limits will not end gerrymandering. Term limits are likely only to mitigate against the worst effects of gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering is specifically the practice of redrawing the boundries of each individual congressional district in order to maximise the advantage for one party or the other - indeed, the two parties will trade off against each other to give each other 'safe' electoral districts that encompass a majority of their core constituencies.

The practice is called "gerrymandering" due to the 'gerry-rigging' of the process and the 'salamander' shapes that often resulted.

The process has gotten so bad that 'salamander' shaped districts would be an improvement upon the present absurdity of fucking polka dot districts!

In short, gerrymandering makes it so that in US Congressional elections, some 90% of incumbents are re-elected, year after year. This is the real evil that term limits are the half-measure of addressing. Get rid of gerrymandering and use fair-square boundries and that will end the need for term limits.

I think you misunderstood me. I don't feel term limits are anti-democratic in the least. I happen to think it will restore sanctity to this institution that was our Republic. There can be no Republic without real representation. It devolves into a plutocracy at that point, same as the once great Roman Empire.

I am much in favor of term limits. Six to twelve years is plenty when they are making over 100 grand a year. As of now Delay is not the only one whose playing that corrupt game. I'm sure they all do to some degree or another. I feel term limits will attract people of character and substance from all walks of life. Not aristocrats just looking to play the game, and enjoy a lavish life. I want people in there that will break it, restore order, and our checks and balances.

I happen to think your dead on with gerrymandering. Maybe we should make a thread/poll that deals with that issue alone? I think the two combined would bring about revolutionary change without all the chaos and blood. Seriously, I see this as a real step in the right direction for this country and it's people. I went to that site, and sent my letter. I would think it would get to the right people even though Porter Goss was still the choice for my district. They need to update that site. It makes me wonder why it has not been done.

11-16-2005, 01:08 AM	#8
zatronanec Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 436 Senior Member	I agree that term limits sound good, but ultimately, they are anti-democratic by attempting to thwart the will of the people to choose the representative of their choice. Term limits will not end gerrymandering. Term limits are likely only to mitigate against the worst effects of gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is specifically the practice of redrawing the boundries of each individual congressional district in order to maximise the advantage for one party or the other - indeed, the two parties will trade off against each other to give each other 'safe' electoral districts that encompass a majority of their core constituencies. The practice is called "gerrymandering" due to the 'gerry-rigging' of the process and the 'salamander' shapes that often resulted. The process has gotten so bad that 'salamander' shaped districts would be an improvement upon the present absurdity of fucking polka dot districts! In short, gerrymandering makes it so that in US Congressional elections, some 90% of incumbents are re-elected, year after year. This is the real evil that term limits are the half-measure of addressing. Get rid of gerrymandering and use fair-square boundries and that will end the need for term limits. I think you misunderstood me. I don't feel term limits are anti-democratic in the least. I happen to think it will restore sanctity to this institution that was our Republic. There can be no Republic without real representation. It devolves into a plutocracy at that point, same as the once great Roman Empire. I am much in favor of term limits. Six to twelve years is plenty when they are making over 100 grand a year. As of now Delay is not the only one whose playing that corrupt game. I'm sure they all do to some degree or another. I feel term limits will attract people of character and substance from all walks of life. Not aristocrats just looking to play the game, and enjoy a lavish life. I want people in there that will break it, restore order, and our checks and balances. I happen to think your dead on with gerrymandering. Maybe we should make a thread/poll that deals with that issue alone? I think the two combined would bring about revolutionary change without all the chaos and blood. Seriously, I see this as a real step in the right direction for this country and it's people. I went to that site, and sent my letter. I would think it would get to the right people even though Porter Goss was still the choice for my district. They need to update that site. It makes me wonder why it has not been done.
	Quote