*Magnify*
SPONSORED LINKS
Printed from https://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1956519-WHY-WE-NEED-TERM-LIMITS
Rated: E · Essay · Political · #1956519
Okay, I've refrained long enough. Time for an opinion from an apolitical observer!
Note: This essay is about American Politics, written by a Poet who doesn't write essays and who does NOT write about politics. Sorry to my non-American friends who may not understand the context of this essay.

WHY WE NEED TERM LIMITS:


The difference in 21st Century American politics is that we now have an echo chamber. This started when the "fairness doctrine" was ended under President Ronald Reagan's leadership. The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced. In 1987, this policy was reversed.

This gave birth to media outlets that represented ideological values, and the rise of what I call the "echo chamber." Americans now do not get a balanced view of politics unless they force themselves to digest many outlets, a task which most Americans do not have time to complete. And therefore, Americans end up with beliefs that are not "checked" by opposing perspectives. The pure examples of this phenomenon is represented by FoxNews and MS-NBC, though the "echo chamber" permeates all of media.

This is because the echo chamber has become a major source of profit for the organizations which fund it. The echo chamber might look like a political tool, but it is actually a business tool, using politics as the product. Profits are maximized by negativity in the echo chamber, and thus our politics have become more negative than anytime since the Civil War.

This context has produced the rise of another interesting perspective: independent thinking. Though independents have always been around, the notion of being an independent is much more prevalent now that we have the echo chamber. And as an Independent, I find myself facing some strange realities about beliefs.

For example, though republicans think I'm a democrat, because I don't tow the party line, and democrats think I'm a republican for the same reasons, I'm really neither. I vote both sides of the ticket, and I don't hate who the echo chamber wants me to hate.

In fact, I believe the best two senators of the 20th century were Richard Lugar (R) and Evan Bayh (D), both of Indiana. They both left office due to the echo chamber. The latter actually declared, upon his voluntary resignation from the Senate, that he felt politics had become "too polarized" and thus nothing could get done. He prophesized what we are now experiencing in American: a completely ineffective government.

Senator Lugar was "primary-ed" by a right wing bolstered and amplified in the echo chamber. And though moderate republicans and moderate democrats in Indiana would have re-elected him once again, he did not get the chance, and the republicans lost the seat, because they nominated a right-wing ideolog with the echo chamber's support.

It's too bad these two Senators didn't end their careers because the constitution required them to leave. I think they would have accomplished more had their term of power been limited by the constitution, instead of the echo chamber. Their succession would have been more orderly, less radical, and the people of Indiana would have benefited more from the process.

We now find our country in yet another "manufactured crisis." Despite the trillions of dollars we have spent on the "War on Terror" to prevent it, our government has been shut down not by external terrorists, but by the echo chamber. With the debate over raising the debt limit, we are facing a looming economic disaster, manufactured by politics, non-existent before the days of the echo chamber.

Because party and power has a higher priority than governance. Politics is supposed to serve governing, not the other way around. But now bills are issued again and again by both sides to serve politics. Over 40 times the house has tried to repeal Obamacare, knowing in advance that they will fail. This was done not for governance, but for political reasons.

Politics, not governance, is the priority.

Because politics is how you hang onto power.

The only big disagreement I ever had with both Lugar and Bayh is when I wrote to them about term limits, and they both responded that elections are the way we limit terms. But the echo chamber has changed that. Before Fox and NBC decided to take sides, people used to think for themselves.

Now elections are controlled by interest groups, the parties, and the echo chamber. And thus politics, not governance, is the priority.

To me, one easy way to realign our priorities is to implement term limits in both houses of Congress. This will take away power by design, and thus governance will become a priority once a politician's term of power is no longer extendable.

For proof, just watch Peter King, the republican congressman from Long Island (New York City.) He's been able to make a republican niche for himself by going after Muslims and by supporting "stop and frisk," two positions that many democrats in NYC support. So he's the unlikely republican getting elected right in the blue-est part of the country.

But he's going to lose his seat, no matter what happens in this shutdown debate. If he votes with the republicans, he loses because the dems will not support him next year. If he votes with the democrats, he loses because he'll get "primary-ed" by the tea party lobbyists that don't even live in NYC.

As a result, he's going to be forced to do the right thing, because he will lose either way.

Or watch Obama. The big difference between this year's debt ceiling limits and 2011's fiasco is that Obama is no longer facing re-election. Whether you agree with him or not, Obama is acting out of what he thinks is good for the country, because his days of power are limited.

It's very evident now that the only way to get politicians to vote their conscience is to make sure they know their days of power are limited.

In this time of outright hatred of Americans by other Americans because of their politics, hatred created and stoked by the echo chamber, there is one thing that Democrats and Republicans agree about: Term Limits.

Okay, there's another thing we agree about: we're disgusted with where our government has found itself. We should focus all our disgust and anxiety on that one single goal. It's not going to be easy, because it's going to take a constitutional amendment to make it work, and we will NOT have the support of our politicians. Our leaders will fight term limits tooth and nail.

We will need to lead from outside of politics in order to get this done. People like me, who really would rather not have to pay attention, will need to lead the effort to change our constitution. In IT Governance we call this segregation of duties. In other words, you can't expect people benefiting from a policy to change the policy.

If you agree with me, please become a Leader yourself. If you need to know where to start, please go to termlimits.org and sign their petition. Though I have not investigated this organization, they seem to be giving kudos and complaints about both parties.

To me, the only ones we can trust to implement term limits are those who belong to neither party. Let us rise, and limit the power of those who can not limit it themselves.
© Copyright 2013 Dan Sturn (dansturn at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Writing.Com, its affiliates and syndicates have been granted non-exclusive rights to display this work.
Log in to Leave Feedback
Username:
Password: <Show>
Not a Member?
Signup right now, for free!
All accounts include:
*Bullet* FREE Email @Writing.Com!
*Bullet* FREE Portfolio Services!
Printed from https://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1956519-WHY-WE-NEED-TERM-LIMITS