Firstly, you will lose a lot of good politicians, who will be disillusioned with the system because they worked hard and did right by their constituents, and yet got ousted.

"Good Politicians" by and large is an oxymoron

Secondly you will lose a lot of experience, so the newly elected officials will flounder for some time.

The bulk of the "experience" we'd be losing is exactly a large part of the problem and why they should be shown the door. The position of "politician for life" is not in the best interest of the people as it enables and encourages growth of small kingdoms within the system.

Thirdly, because you are not selecting a replacement fully on the issues and the person, you will get people elected who really shouldn't be there.

Here we find common ground. There are the rare and odd exceptions within our political system of folks who care about the concerns of their constituants and are there for the "right" reasons and these obviously have to be looked at and thought upon individually by the voters.

Sadly too many of "my fellow Americans" have a hard time thinking through the choice of which inane TV channel to watch next which obviously makes the more complicated process of individually vetting political candidates more complicated than they are interested in makin the required investment of time and thought processes to.

All in all the seeming best course forward is to out any candidate who has voted against the individual voters concerns and as a good start to also dethrone any candidate who's served more than 2 consecutive terms as a means towards settin a precedence for this process.

When even the office of Pres. has to be vacated every 8yrs at max the same reasons and ideas should be considered reasonable for congresspeople. Unfortunately our own laws prohibit term limits ever coming to pass without the legislators it would effect 1st placing a bill for this on the table and then finding a majority of legislators to back it. Mostly that is just like sayin "That'll never happen"