Originally published at: Dianne Feinstein can't remember leaving Capitol for 3 months; snaps at reporter "I haven't been gone." | Boing Boing
…
2 Likes
She is still clearly a better senator than any Republican senator and still not the worst Democrat in the Senate. But yeah, it’s time to step down after a long and storied career.
14 Likes
That makes me sad.
14 Likes
A terrible situation. Her so-called friends who pretended for at least a year that nothing was wrong should be ashamed of themselves.
17 Likes
There is no way close friends and family didn’t know or couldn’t tell for way longer than a year. Colleagues I can understand because they aren’t close most likely and perhaps don’t want to rock the boat at work …
What a horrible way to end a career.
18 Likes
Schumer was claiming everything was normal just the other day. Her staff has been split between those who’ve been leaking to the press and the careerists who’ve been trying to keep the gravy train rolling a bit longer.
I also have to wonder what part her doctors have been playing here. They obviously can’t go to the press, but she’s long past the point where a physician is required by law to report the condition to the authorities or (in certain cases) an employer.
13 Likes
Ugh… Really? Wtf chuck?
8 Likes
Schumer on 9 May:
“I’m glad that my friend Dianne is back in the Senate and ready to roll up her sleeves and get to work,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “After talking with her multiple times over the past few weeks, it’s clear she’s back where she wants to be and ready to deliver for California.”
[Source]
WTF, indeed.
10 Likes
Beyond terms limits, political positions need age limits. This certainly isn’t the first time we have seen situations like this. Personally I think it’s exceedingly rare to find someone who is +80 that has a good understanding of what someone 25 is experiencing in life.
Hell, I’m nearing my mid 40’s and realized I was “old” recently when I was put on a new team and we did the whole get to know you thing. A fellow team mate made a comment that he liked anime…he put up a picture of Naruto (specifically mentioning one he grew up with.) Insert Nathan Fillion questioning gif here.
2 Likes
Term limits alone should be good enough. Feinstein would’ve been moving along to other things in her early seventies had this been the case. If people really want to vote for an octogenarian, let them. Most won’t though, for reasons like you mentioned, which is why the Biden thing is so worrisome.
9 Likes
term limits for everything. senate, house, supreme court, federal judges, dogcatchers.
7 Likes
Those First Ones can be mysterious.
11 Likes
What, in your opinion, should be the maximum number of terms that someone should be able to serve in the Senate?
I don’t thing that the current gerintocracy is great for this country, but playing devil’s advocate here, Biden served more time as a senator (36 years) than Feinstein did and that was before he became Obama’s VP. And some of Bernie Sanders’s strongest supporters are young people.
Maybe if we could find a way to make party primaries more competitive every election, even for incumbent legislators, that would help to dislodge ineffective lawmakers. But I don’t think there’s an obvious panacea.
11 Likes
Okay, I need to throw my 2 cents in here about term limits. They might seem good in theory, but they are terrible in practice. Term limits mean only the wealthy can run for office, because others can’t afford to change jobs every four years. (Yes, I know elections mean that could happen anyway.) If somebody is doing a good job, why should they be forced out? It becomes a rich person’s hobby, rather than an important job to take seriously. Here in Ohio there is frequent talk about how the lobbyists run the capitol – they have more experience with government than the legislators because of term limits.
9 Likes
A limit of four terms (24 years) would be reasonable for the Senate, with no formal age barrier. The path to the office being what it is, most of them will move onto other endeavours in their 60s or 70s anyhow. A quarter century is more than enough time to make decisions on behalf an increasing number of citizens who are younger than the office-holder.
It’s not a panacea and would have to be implemented in concert with other measures (such as the one you suggest). But it would help avoid problems like this while preserving the benefits of long service.
That’s already the case in the Senate and House without term limits, so it’s not a decisive factor in determining whether term limits are a positive or negative.
4 Likes
Why do you assume this? A supermajority(68%) of the senate is over 60.
4 Likes
I was saying that under the scenario where there was a term limit. I’d imagine a lot of them would remain involved in civic life (e.g. running for President, becoming a SCOTUS justice, running an NGO) in some capacity into their 80s or 90s after their time in the Senate expired.
The typical current situation for most Senators is that they enter office in their 40s or 50s and stay until their 80s or 90s (as was the case with the monstrous Strom Thurmond) until health issues or death forces them out or (in limited cases) they run for President. With a 24-year limit most (though not all) Senators would be out of office in their 60s and 70s, still young enough to move on to other things while leaving a political legacy.
Hope that clarifies.
6 Likes
Maybe She was there with Her thoughts and prayers.
3 Likes
I would argue that Congress is the exception (although even in the House there are some middle class/working class reps who probably wouldn’t be there with term limit rules. The bigger problem is in state and local government, where lobbyists are even more in control and talented legislators are sent home.
1 Like
I’ve never heard of this. Is this a thing for people with dementia?
3 Likes
