> On Jan 22, 2013, at 8:07 PM, Richard
Fobes<electionmeth...@votefair.org> wrote:
>> In this discussion about term limits, I forgot to mention
>> an important U.S.-specific deal-breaker.
>>
>> The United States Supreme Court ruled that (using the words
>> in Wikipedia) "states cannot impose term limits upon their
>> federal Representatives or Senators.
>> ...
On 1/22/2013 5:48 PM, aGREATER.US wrote:
That's why we're going for an omnibus Constitutional Amendment.
Ah, I had forgotten the specific goal.
In that case I agree that term limits for Congressmen should be included
-- along with a ban on single-mark ballots. That would split up
opposition so that special interests have to fight against both reforms.
And any success in opposing term limits would increase the odds of
success for banning single-mark ballots.
Now I understand why you cannot embrace someone who is unwilling to
consider term limits as part of the proposed Amendment.
Thanks for the clarification.
Richard Fobes
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
