A push for term limits from the unlikeliest of places

I don't agree with term limits.

Yes, career senators and congressmen results in cronyism. But rotating them in and out creates another problem that I think is just as bad - it means they will all focus solely on short-term interests. "What can I get in my limited time here?" And the lobbyists and backers who own them now will simply adjust to that reality.

Between politicians who have long-term interests that might occasionally actually be beneficial to their constituents and the country, and politicians looking to grab what they can in a few years and who cares what happens after that, I prefer the former.

We have too many professional politicians, imo. Term limits aren't enough. They need to be shot when they leave office, as well.

Being good at their jobs means being able to stay in office, more often than not by delivering pork. Seriously. Especially in the House. They have to start thinking about reelection almost immediately after they take office, especially these days with the way information flows.

Senators are in office for six years. Mutlti-term Senators are the anchor, as it were, to government not being overrun completely by rubes.

And having reasonable term limits wouldn't lead to waves of inexperienced short-timers, at all. Maybe three terms is too few for House members. But you know, it seems to me that after more than three terms, if a House member can't move up to the Senate, then they've peaked politically and really won't have anything more to offer, for the most part (there are exceptions, to be sure). Their primary goal becomes holding on to the power they have.

Maybe pixie dust? Or a magic spell?

The perfectly valid reasons that most voters will never be adequately informed have been explained over and over and over again. Bryan Caplan does a bang-up job here. Short version: "Voters are worse than ignorant; they are, in a word, irrational—and vote accordingly."

Add in the high cost in time of being adequately informed. Mix in the opportunity to pick from severely limited options, each of which bundles positions on myriad issues, so you're guaranteed a heaping helping of the bad along with the good, and your vote is already hopelessly compromised.

Now consider, just for the presidential election, the dozens of issues that were never even raised. The candidates spent most of their time dissing each other, playing identity politics to protect their base, and the rest making promises everybody knows they have no intention of keeping. And you expect voters to pay attention and care about the outcome? You expect them to make the effort to be adequately informed on dozens of issues so that they can make informed decisions on candidates from dog catcher to president, when most of what those candidates present for consumption is plainly smoke and mirrors?

Srsly?

It's never, ever going to happen. There will be unicorns flying across the sky in formation farting rainbows before that happens.

Time to come up with a better plan for a functional society than "majority" rule.