Dianne Feinstein Continues to be a Good Argument for Term-Limits

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11213581/Congress-age-senate-house.html

No you don't, negative attention from strangers on the internet is the only reason you wake up in the morning.

Yeah, these fuckers really need to go, but they make so much money off of insider trading and lobbying that they won't leave.

I think quitting their jobs is akin to them admitting they're about to die. They know nothing else.

Diane Feinstein - 90 - 32nd yr in office
Chuck Grassley - 89 - 43rd yr in office
Bernie Sanders - 81 - 16th yr
Mitch McConnel - 81 - 40th yr
Jim Risch - 80 - 14th yr
Ben Cardin - 79 - 16th yr
Angus King - 79 - 11th yr
Dick Durbin - 78 - 27th yr
18 others at least 70

I would argue that term limits alone are not ideal unless you also have age ceilings. A term limit should be pretty long if you have one because you need to not have the staffers and lobbyists know more than the office holder - say something like 18 years - in each house. On top of that pick an age, say for example 80, and state that if more than half of the upcoming term would fall beyond your 80th birthday you are disqualified from running again.
See for example Peter Welch, just elected last year from Vermont - he's already 76. 18 years would take him into his 90's.

In an ideal world, public office would be a calling, not a career.

In an ideal world, people wouldn't be fuckheads and we would barely need governments at all.

Looks like the youngest going into office (from that list) is 41. Many were well into their 60s. … I could run for Senate.

This is disturbing to watch, Mitch freezes again. Mitch needs to step down.

Pretty fucked up that old Mitch will receive top quality health care for this but other elderly citizens his age won’t be able to receive the same level of health care as him because he spent a lifetime working to block it eh?

If McConnell steps down, Democrats need to refuse to allow Republicans to replace him on committees.

Enough of this two-rulebooks crap.

Mitch already was looking to retire out of the Senate earlier and IIRC he won't because the repugs might not get to chose his replacement. Kentucky elected a dem governor and there would be a fight they might lose to keep him from appointing who would serve out his term until a special election or the next election.

The only way Mitch is leaving before the next election is in a box because he won't give Bashear the chance to appoint.

I am not sure why they felt they couldn't run someone else last election, but Mitch ran another term planning on retiring out almost immediately after he was voted in. He just wasn't in enough control of his replacement so he is stuck until the end of the next term, and hopefully that will mean very little rest and retirement for him to enjoy.

Could not have happened to a more awful turtle.

Nancy Pelosi, age 83, has announced she's running again next year.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/nancy-pelosi-reelection-house-seat/index.html

Fucking Christ.

Well, unlike McConnell and Feinstein, no one is saying she's not capable of doing the job, but jeezus...when is enough, enough already?

I think there should not be an automatic disqualification by age. As far as I've seen, Nancy Pelosi is physically and mentally fit to do her job. <Insert joke here, Rightforge> That is to say, she has not publicly shown anything on the scale of these McConnell freezes, she hasn't basically had to be propped up like Feinstein, etc.

Can Pelosi reasonably be expected to serve till she's 85? Older? Maybe, maybe not. Would it be better for all concerned if she were to step aside and let any number of capable candidates who share her values take the spot? Absolutely

Trimming your post.

16 years in the Senate. Bernie also did 16 years in the House as Vermont’s At Large Rep before moving to the Senate.

Guess who succeeded him?

Moses?

That insider trading gig pays pretty good.

All these Boomers need to be shown the door. This is fucking embarrassing.

Assuming for argument's sake that she or other members of Congress are insider trading, I tend to doubt that's the reason people would want to remain in office. Google suggests that Pelosi's net worth is 120 mil or thereabouts and McConnell's is 95 mill.

Putting aside the "how many yachts do you need to water ski behind" part, it's not like they really need to stay members of Congress to insider trading. They would be just as likely to get tips from their ex Congressional buddies, their contacts in various injuries as ex-Congresspeople as they are as Congresspeople.

Best case scenario it is ego. She doesn’t want to give up power.

My worry is that she feels Jeffries isn’t ready and that she needs to remain as an advisor in case Trump wins in 24. Although that could could also be ego.

Hopefully it is somewhere in the middle. Or something else.

While in general I want the baton to be passed we are living in interesting times and having the most capable Speaker in 110 years in the office next to you isn’t a resource to be tossed aside lightly.

Ok, I'll give you that one

https://www.latimes.com/california/...in-california-senate-health-family-feud-money

I'm sorry I moved out of California so I cannot vote for her opponent

Her most likely opponent is a sentient man-bun. You're not missing much.

Newsom confirms that if Feinstein resigns, he will appoint a caretaker, not anyone who's running for the seat in 2024.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/10/newsom-lee-senate-california-00114885

I'll let his office know I'm interested.

I can think of much worse people.

Wait, people?

I thought he was a carb-loving, Monday-hating cat?