- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/26024422
Saikat Chakrabarti, AOC’s former chief of staff, thinks the Democrats need a bolder vision.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/26024422
Saikat Chakrabarti, AOC’s former chief of staff, thinks the Democrats need a bolder vision.
I think the age thing is a problem, if for no other reason than that very old politicians won’t have to live as long in the world that they create. Sure, for politicians of good faith, that wouldn’t matter much; but many of the ones currently in office would absolutely trade our future for their own temporary enrichment, knowing that they won’t be here when the chickens come home to roost.
Like I said, I think far too much time is spent on things that are really side-issues and red herring such as term limits and age.
You could have someone in their 20s (or whatever the minimum age is for a given position) come in there, still do insider trading, still do everything for the sake of the owner-donor class and then go through that revolving door into a cozy job within the corporate world as a reward for doing everything they were told in their single term and it would still be a huge problem.
Howling about someone’s age or how many terms they have served seem to just be a distraction from the real problems. To me, anyway.
Yeah, so we need to plug all of those holes, too. I’m not saying that’s the thing that’d solve everything. Just that it helps.
Term limits makes buying politicians more expensive and insider trading less lucrative, while containing the damage one bad actor can do. Overturning Citizens United makes it even more expensive. Switching from FPTP to ranked choice voting makes third party candidates more viable. Abolishing the Electoral College equalizes the value of votes between rural and urban citizens. Age limits make it so that politicians have to live with the consequences of their actions for longer. Expanding the judiciary makes justice swifter and makes it less likely that a politician who breaks the law can escape justice by being elected again.
There’s certainly not a magic bullet. We have to do a lot of things. I’d agree that age limits aren’t the highest problems on the list—but they’re on it.
I just think that (upper) age limits will quickly become rather myopic, and this may happen sooner than most people think.
I also think term limits is usually a stalking horse for the far right for other matters and I don’t think those outside the far right should fall for it. I think term limits solves nothing and I also think that robs people of incumbents that they love. If people keep choosing the same people to put into office, why the hell not? Most especially if it’s like any other job.
I think if we solve the actual problems, age and term limits fall by the wayside as the red herring they are for several reasons.
I don’t think it should be a set number. I think it should be pegged to the average life expectancy in the US. That gives them an incentive to make policy that improves lifespan.
Even a broken clock can want the right thing for the wrong reasons twice a day. (I think that’s how the saying goes?)
I think it makes politicians more expensive to bribe.
In a functional democracy, sure! But an incumbent has a massive advantage over any challenger, and primarying them almost always fails; even for remarkably unpopular candidates. “Better the devil you know…”
Maybe. But I don’t know if those problems can stay solved.