Other than in the past on a professional basis, when he wrote highly technical articles about IBM's AS/400 computer system, Brian Kelly receives no compensation for his work. Additionally, Kelly has not taken any donations or contributions other than for his US Senate Campaign of 2012. Mr. Kelly has recetly canceled his write-in campaign for the US Senate, and instead he endorses Tom Smith for US Senator from Pennsylvania v. Robert P. Casey Jr. If you would like to donate to the closed campaign to help defray costs, feel free to go to www.kellyforussenate.com and click the DONATE button. Your donations are most appreciated.
Additionally, if you would like to help Mr. Kelly in his efforts to continue to write free patriotic articles and to write additional patriotic books for the good of America, feel free to visit this site or that site to purchase Mr. Kelly's patriotic books. His latest book, Saving America, the How-To Book is available from this site. Thank you.
Please enjoy the rest of this article.
I would suggest that each time a candidate wins a particular office for the third time, or has been in that office for 6 consecutive years, in order to be reelected again, they should be required to have 5% more votes than their opponent. Each subsequent attempt at reelection should require an additional cumulative 1% vote separation per year. With such rules, only if an incumbent's popularity increases would they be able to stay in office. If their popularity goes down, a lesser known candidate with no giveaways, and no people in their pocket, and nothing in the proverbial bag, gets to represent the people.
So, let's say that there is a 13-term Congressman running in your district for a fourteenth two-year term. That would mean that this Congressman would need to get 5 + 20 = 25 more points than the challenger in order to continue in office. In year 27, the first year of a two-year term, a challenger with 36% of the votes in this case would beat an incumbent with 64%. As you can see, at some time around the fifth or sixth two-year term, it gets fairly difficult for a candidate to win reelection. Thus, the objective of term limits is served without having hard and fast term limits.
The Founders thought the people would be smarter than we seem to be. They could not imagine that we would put the same corrupt representatives in office time and time again. Term limits were supposed to be determined by the people by not reelecting scoundrels back into office. It is our fault that it got like this and more importantly, it is our fault if it keeps getting worse with our choosing to keep the same bums in office for long periods of time.
Let's change the system to one that works but in the meantime, the best term limits are easily enforceable simply by your voting the bums out.