Why do we allow Senators and Congressmen to run for president?

[shance]

Its quite obvious how, however well intentioned, those senators and Congressman running, neglect their constituents and their responsibilities (and their job like showing up for important votes). It's not their fault as much as it's bad governmental policy.

It makes absolutely no sense why any Congressional leader should be allowed to run in my opinion.

Also, why do individuals in Washington harp about how Dean cannot run in 2008, which is fine btw, however when many of them Hillary Clinton included will be skirting her duties so she can achieve her Holy Grail. I do not fault Hillary by herself. Kerry and all the others before him are equally responsible for neglecting their duties while running, because no one can be in two places at one time.

It certainly would make more sense to allow someone like Howard Dean to run for president, than have a Senator or Congressional leader miss important votes that effect our daily lives than the head of the DNC who has no direct impact on the legislation passage.

[Cuban_Liberal]

1. Because they meet the Constitution's requirements to run. n/t

[genius]

26. Some do. Some don't. Dennis didn't, a sign of his integrity.

There should be a Congressional rule against abandoning their Congressional work to run a campaign.

[Warpy]

2. They also know how the system works

and they have a shot at making it work for US.

Remember Jimmy Carter? He campaigned as an outsider and they ate him alive.

[globalvillage]

3. Because this is (still) America? n/t

[shance]

5. Please explain to me what in the world that means.

You've lost me on the Lee Greenwood inspired response.

[OneTwentyoNine]

6. Means almost anyone including the local dog catcher can run for Pres...

When Governors run its usually brought up over and over that they lack the real political experience and don't have a clue about foreign affairs.

[shance]

8. Id actually be cool with dog catchers running, its the Congress Im

concerned about.

:)

I don't really see the argument as illogical. People may not want the change, but it seems to me we'd be better served if our legislators werent always running either for their own office all the time, or for a new and improved one.

[ProgressiveConn]

4. The problem is incumbency NOT being a legislator.

It doesn't matter what they are. If Howard Dean was the sitting Gov of VT wouldn't he be failing his constituents in Vermont while he would be out campaigning for President?

I'd support an amendment to ban incumbents from running for re-election but thats me and I'm insane. =)

[LiberalFighter]

7. Who was the last Senator or Congressman that won?

Next question...

How many Senators and Congressman have won election as President?

Analyze that and it should indicate that they cannot win except under certain conditions.

[shance]

9. "They cannot win except under certain conditions"

Why?

[LiberalFighter]

18. Historical

Forget about Kennedy being a Senator
He was also a war hero

Eisenhower had no political background but was a war hero

Washington a war hero

Don't remember who else besides Jackson


Essentially, they need to be a war hero, a Governor or VP

There have been Senators that have been President like Johnson, Truman, Andrew Johnson, and others. But they had also been VP.

[kevsand]

14. I think only two sitting Senators

won the Presidency in the twentieth century. Kennedy was the last. I'm told Warren Harding was the other.

I don't think any sitting Representative won in the twentieth century. I'd need some help from the history buffs to go back any further.

[LittleClarkie]

10. "should be allowed"?

My pet goat could run for President if it so desired. Now "allowing" involved.

Welcome to America, where anyone can give it a shot, even more than once if they wanna. It's up to the voters. If the voters get sick of Senators and Congressmen, they won't vote for them. Simple.

Democracies are kinda cool that way, don't you think?

[shance]

11. "allowing" is a bit imperialistic***not my intent.

I meant to ask: why are the rules set up in such a way that those ALREADY EMPLOYED as a legislator can keep their job at the same time and run on "company time" and not give up a thing?

Not to mention the fact they are not fulfilling (because no one logically could fulfill their duties) their job as a legislator.

Im simply proposing that we as citizens are on the losing end of the deal. (Whats new, I know.)

Thats all I am saying.

[ISUGRADIA]

12. Because the voters in that state or district can decide at the next

election if they felt neglected. Some Senators win after running for president and losing (Tom Harkin, Dick Lugar, Bob Kerrey, Ted Kennedy) and some lose (Frank Church, Bob Smith, Birch Bayh). Being a legislator is not all votes and committee hearings, the consituents can decide. Unemployed people should not be the only ones running for president.

[shance]

13. You're assuming we are now having fair elections?

:)

[hughee99]

25. I don't belive your pet goat would meet the age requirement.

Unless you have a very old goat.

[bywho4who]

15. Vote for state Senator

Why the hell did they even start this lame ass thinking it's your state appoint the best person for the job. you know the one that doesn't steal!

[shraby]

16. What's worse? A Senator or Representative

taking the time to run for president, or the president taking time from running the country to bounce all over and campaign? There is no two ways around it, if they want to run, they have to campaign. If the campaign season were shorter, that might circumvent the lapse in their service to the post they were elected to.
In these days of internet and television, there is not reason for the campaign season to last so long. 3 months should be plenty of time to get your message across. Anything beyond that time is redundant.

[shance]

17. That's a great point .Ive seen it mentioned here before and

its a valid point.

There is no legitimate reason for a Congressman to take up to a couple of years out of their work that they are supposed to be doing, to run for office.

[ArtVandaley]

22. I agree with your point about shorter campaigns

The season lasts much longer than it needs to.

[Dookus]

19. by your logic

no sitting president should ever be allowed to run for re-election. He'd be neglecting his job, no?

In fact, any office-holder would be barred from running any other office. Silly.

[shraby]

20. I didn't mean they shouldn't run,

I meant that the campaign season should be shortened. Another thought, a sitting president should be known enough by his deeds, that he only needs to communicate what he would do in another term.

Campaigning for the next presidential election shouldn't start as soon as the last results are announced and the votes stored, and that is almost the case now.

[ArtVandaley]

21. So you think JFK never should have been allowed to run for President?

He was a sitting Senator. Would it have been better to have gone with Stevenson again?

[dolstein]

23. One example in the last 100 years does not an argument make

Seriously, just have far back would you have to look to find another sitting Senator who successfully ran for President?

[ArtVandaley]

24. Last 45 years . . .

2 sitting Senators have lost a general election, 1 has won. I hardly think those stats overwhelmingly make your case.

[blm]

29. Only two Democratic nominees ever had to run against a mostly RW media

controlled by the GOP. Gore and Kerry. Back in 92 when a Democrat could still define his campaign, the mainstream media was still fairly balanced.

Today a Democratic nominee has about 90% of the broadcast media under GOP control.

Historic precedent means nothing in these days of corporate media.

[ComerPerro]

27. What about Presidents running for re-election

Of course, that probably woudln't apply to Bush.

I mean, he leaves Washington to campaign. So what. Its not like he is there much of the time anyway, and its not as though he would actually do anything were he there.

[shance]

28. What about anybody running for re-election? They already hold the position

They aren't running for a new position.

However, you do bring up a good question of how long should campaigning be allowed to take place? They do hold the most important job in the country and it could be said that Congressmen and women do as well.

I bring the subject up for people to consider and honestly ask themselves as a constituent and American citizen, how much do you want to see your leaders in Washington campaigning when the country is potentially being neglected due to their campaigning?

Seems to me its a legitimate question worth a little exploration.