Political Office Term Limitations

441 Words2 Pages
Political Office Term Limitations Troyce L. Usener Grantham University Marion Rogers GP210 October 23, 2011 Abstract This is a discussion on whether an elected official should be allowed to stay in an official position for an undetermined amount of time. This paper presents positives and negative points to both sides of this argument. Some groups believe that holding office for too long breeds abuse and corruption while the other side believes that inexperienced politicians may bring new ideas but can not effect change because of the sharp learning curve that comes with a new political position. There are two trains of thought on “term limits”. One train of thought suggests that our government should have limited terms to inject new blood into the government. The other train of thought suggests that experienced politicians know how to move political processes forward and limiting their time in office limits this ability. Our government was established by free thinkers that wanted to break away from the tyrannical structure of England. To ensure that our nation does not fall into the same structure, limitations were placed on government positions but not on the overall length of time an official can hold an office overall other than our presidency. This was established to ensure that our representatives could be renewed as often as needed to reflect the public’s beliefs. Proponents for term limitations feel that officials can become corrupt and abusive of their position. These groups wish to limit the overall time that an official can hold office to ensure that new blood will be able to inject new ideas and beliefs. The opposite to this thought is that by injecting new blood we will lose the experienced politicians that know how to get things done in the complex world of politics. There is a sharp learning curve that comes with holding
Open Document