[JoeRedskin]

Well, of course, that is the consistent conundrum of a representative democracy - particularly one with a constituency of ~300,000,000 people. Simply put, you cannot legislate people into being good.

If you prohibit lobbyist money, because money always finds a way to gain access, corruption will increase and transparency disappear making it near impossible for the electorate to hold anyone accountable (Folks with the cash will find a way to pay for access - legally or illegally. Most prefer to do it legally so as to avoid risk, but, given the financial stakes, you cannot turn off the tap and illegal methods will suffice).

If you enforce term limits, than the only professionals in government - those who have long term institutional knowledge of how to "get things done" - are the unelected lobbyists, bureaucrats, and non-governmental organizations all of whom will trade expertise (and money) for access (or authority/power in the case of bureaucrats) at the expense of electorate's interests.

If you don't have term limits, you get professional public officials cozying up to professional lobbyists who are detached from and non-responsive to the electorate.

The ONLY way to avoid these pitfalls in a representative democracy and to ensure that elected officials are responsive to "the people and voters" is to have an active and informed electorate that will investigate their representatives positions & cash flow and then hold their representatives accountable for their voting record and funding sources.

We ... are ... doomed.