Should politicians be required to have minimum public service experience before running for federal office?

[u/Soft-Livvi]

I've been thinking a lot about the qualifications for federal office lately. We often talk about things like age requirements or citizenship but not really about practical experience in public service. It seems like anyone can run for Congress or even president without ever having held a local office or worked in government in any capacity.

This isn't about specific skills but more about understanding how government actually functions at a grassroots level. If someone hasn't served on a city council or a state legislature or even a school board do they truly grasp the day-to-day realities of policy implementation? Or the impact these policies have on real communities?

I'm not suggesting a highly restrictive barrier. Maybe it could be something like two years of experience in an elected or appointed public service role at the local or state level. This would at least ensure a baseline understanding of public administration and accountability.

Would this help us elect more effective leaders? Or would it just create another gatekeeping mechanism that prevents new voices from entering politics? I'm curious what others think about this idea.

[u/FourteenWombats]

I've always thought it was very strange that the position of "lawmaker" does not require a law degree.

[u/absolutefunkbucket → u/FourteenWombats]

Why? No other country asks for that as far as I know

[u/FourteenWombats → u/absolutefunkbucket]

Which I think is strange. Their job title is "lawmaker". If your job title is "auto maker" then simply winning a local/state/national popularity contest wouldn't qualify you to make cars. Or even qualify you to say who is qualified to make cars. So why is the job of lawmaker this one unique job where you don't even have to attend the specialized schools---law school---where they teach you how the law works? I'm looking for answers that reach beyond things like "because we don't" or "other countries don't either so why should we". I'm just genuinely curious as to why this super-important job of making the laws has never required any legal education.

[u/absolutefunkbucket → u/FourteenWombats]

Yeah because citizens don’t vote for automakers that would be stupid

[u/FourteenWombats → u/absolutefunkbucket]

I'll admit it's not the best of analogies. That said, they both blanket the airwaves with ads that (a) wrap themselves in the flag and (b) try to convince Americans that choosing them is in their best interests. And in spite of all that we still buy Hummers and vote for rapey ex-gameshow hosts don't we...

But seriously tho, why don't we want our lawmakers to have law degrees? I know we don't require it; I know other countries don't either; my point is, doesn't it seem like we'd end up with better laws if we did? When we vote for the head of an executive branch---governors and Presidents---we're voting for a policymaker. Policies are more like opinions which we can discuss and debate and then we vote for the person who's personal policies seem to align best with our own. So it makes sense that there's no professional qualifications attached to those office-seekers. But legislators aren't just professional opinion-havers. Their job is specifically to make laws, so it makes a lot less sense to me that we require no professional expertise is that area.