• DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    They could vote for the legislation, maybe push for an amendment, that doesn’t kick in for about 10 years.

    e.g. starting 1 January 2036, no person can be a member of Congress who has been in office for 10 or more years, consecutively or non-consecutively. This does not apply to any person who was a Congressperson at the time that this amendment was ratified; and years served before 1 January 2030 will not count.

    and/or,

    e.g. notwithstanding the aforementioned, starting 1 January 2060, no person can be a member of Congress who has been a member of Congress for 10 or more years, consecutively or non-consecutively.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      “they’ll only vote for policies that benefit the country if it doesn’t affect them” tells you everything about the people currently in power.

      • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Agreed, it does;

        nonetheless, my example indicates that positive change is still possible, not soon but neither too long, even by such incumbents.

        If they did this 20 years ago, and my suggested dates were 20 years earlier, wp:Chip Roy couldn’t run in 2030, wp:Matt Gaetz couldn’t run in 2028, and wp:Mike Johnson could not run this November.