The Idiocy of Term Limits
Normally when I compose one of these little diatribes I start with as many facts as I can muster about the subject. This serves two purposes: hopefully inoculating me from making hugely stupid or false statements, and imposing some sort of order on the essay. In the case of term limits, however, facts are difficult to come by—but there is no shortage of opinion. Supporters of term limits usually hit three themes: corruption, or the amount of influence lobbyists have on legislators, the lack of diversity and the preponderance of career politicians in legislatures without term limits (such as Congress), and the savings from decreased spending that must surely follow when term limits are imposed.
Writing in the Washington Post Niraj Choksi managed to cite several different abstracts from major sources: a 2006 National Conference of State Legislatures study, a 2010 Wayne State University study, and a 2005 Public Policy Institute of California study. NCSL is an advocacy group for state legislatures—if they have an agenda it is in making state legislatures more independent of the Federal government. Wayne State is in midtown Detroit and is active in Michigan public policy. PPIC is a non-partisan research organization dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California.
Corruption and Lobbyists
Most observers surveyed by the JPTL (Joint Project on Term Limits) believe that lobbyists have gained at least some power with term limits, while observers in non-term limits states saw lobbyist influence as steady or even declining during the past decade.
—NCSL
The results of the research show that lobbyists' influence over legislators was not only maintained after term limits were in effect, but may have increased. For instance, special interests' importance as a source of "information and guidance" on a bill about school choice increased after term limits began.
—Wayne State
Special interest money still flows in roughly the same proportions to Senate and Assembly leaders and in ever-rising amounts; term limits have not eased the burden of fundraising in any way.
—PPIC
Diversity and Career Politicians
Term limits have not led to the new breed of diverse, citizen legislators proponents expected to see…political careerism does not seem to end with term limits. Rather than returning to their previous careers or private sector jobs, long-serving members in term-limited states are likely to run for other elective office, particularly for the upper chamber or a local office.
—NCSL
By extending term limits, freshmen representatives would have experienced legislators to mentor them, committee chairs and party leaders would have enough time to develop skills and relationships, while still preventing them from serving for decades. In addition, a longer term means that rather than campaigning for their next position, legislators would have a longer time to focus on their current position of leading the state effectively.
—Wayne State
Rather than representing a new breed of “citizen legislator,” however, new members after term limits behave a great deal like their precursors. Many have local government experience and run for another office—for an Assembly or a Senate seat—when their terms expire. Careerism remains a constant in California politics.
—PPIC
Cost Savings
Perhaps the most significant effect of term limits uncovered by the JPTL is the decline in the influence of the legislative branch of state government in relation to the executive branch. This decline in legislative power is most visible in the budget process.
—NCSL
The study also found that term limits greatly diminished the amount of time and effort legislators spend monitoring state-run agencies, despite the fact they were supposed to increase legislators' independence from bureaucratic influence.
—Wayne State
As a body, the Legislature is less likely to alter the Governor’s Budget, and its own budget process neither encourages fiscal discipline nor links legislators’ requests to overall spending goals.
—PPIC
Hmmm. Looks like term limits accomplish exactly none of the things advocates claim they do.
At this point I think I’m entitled to share a few opinions of my own. First, you’ve heard it said a thousand times before, but it’s still true. We have term limits. We’ve always had term limits. They’re called elections. Intelligent voters do not need term limits—they have done their own research and vote their interests accordingly.
Second, term limits violate the most basic voting right—the right to vote for the person you feel most qualified for the job. When you get down to it, term limits work like this: Suppose you think legislator X (who represents a district on the other side of the state) is a corrupt bag of poop. You pass term limits, and voila, legislator X terms out after a few years. Now your wonderful legislator Y, whom you’ve watched time and again vote to support the interests of the people in your district, must leave as well. Term limits have effectively suppressed your right to vote freely for the person of your choice.
Finally, term limits are elitist. They assume an electorate that is not smart enough to vote out bad legislators, and must have it done for them, like cutting up food for a child. Look, I get it--you're angry, you think all politicians are liars who never do anything. But don't fall for the term limits lie. It won't fix everything. In fact it won't really fix anything. Only voting for intelligent, committed public servants will. And you'll have to do the research to decide who merits your vote.
Writing in the Washington Post Niraj Choksi managed to cite several different abstracts from major sources: a 2006 National Conference of State Legislatures study, a 2010 Wayne State University study, and a 2005 Public Policy Institute of California study. NCSL is an advocacy group for state legislatures—if they have an agenda it is in making state legislatures more independent of the Federal government. Wayne State is in midtown Detroit and is active in Michigan public policy. PPIC is a non-partisan research organization dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California.
Corruption and Lobbyists
Most observers surveyed by the JPTL (Joint Project on Term Limits) believe that lobbyists have gained at least some power with term limits, while observers in non-term limits states saw lobbyist influence as steady or even declining during the past decade.
—NCSL
The results of the research show that lobbyists' influence over legislators was not only maintained after term limits were in effect, but may have increased. For instance, special interests' importance as a source of "information and guidance" on a bill about school choice increased after term limits began.
—Wayne State
Special interest money still flows in roughly the same proportions to Senate and Assembly leaders and in ever-rising amounts; term limits have not eased the burden of fundraising in any way.
—PPIC
Diversity and Career Politicians
Term limits have not led to the new breed of diverse, citizen legislators proponents expected to see…political careerism does not seem to end with term limits. Rather than returning to their previous careers or private sector jobs, long-serving members in term-limited states are likely to run for other elective office, particularly for the upper chamber or a local office.
—NCSL
By extending term limits, freshmen representatives would have experienced legislators to mentor them, committee chairs and party leaders would have enough time to develop skills and relationships, while still preventing them from serving for decades. In addition, a longer term means that rather than campaigning for their next position, legislators would have a longer time to focus on their current position of leading the state effectively.
—Wayne State
Rather than representing a new breed of “citizen legislator,” however, new members after term limits behave a great deal like their precursors. Many have local government experience and run for another office—for an Assembly or a Senate seat—when their terms expire. Careerism remains a constant in California politics.
—PPIC
Cost Savings
Perhaps the most significant effect of term limits uncovered by the JPTL is the decline in the influence of the legislative branch of state government in relation to the executive branch. This decline in legislative power is most visible in the budget process.
—NCSL
The study also found that term limits greatly diminished the amount of time and effort legislators spend monitoring state-run agencies, despite the fact they were supposed to increase legislators' independence from bureaucratic influence.
—Wayne State
As a body, the Legislature is less likely to alter the Governor’s Budget, and its own budget process neither encourages fiscal discipline nor links legislators’ requests to overall spending goals.
—PPIC
Hmmm. Looks like term limits accomplish exactly none of the things advocates claim they do.
At this point I think I’m entitled to share a few opinions of my own. First, you’ve heard it said a thousand times before, but it’s still true. We have term limits. We’ve always had term limits. They’re called elections. Intelligent voters do not need term limits—they have done their own research and vote their interests accordingly.
Second, term limits violate the most basic voting right—the right to vote for the person you feel most qualified for the job. When you get down to it, term limits work like this: Suppose you think legislator X (who represents a district on the other side of the state) is a corrupt bag of poop. You pass term limits, and voila, legislator X terms out after a few years. Now your wonderful legislator Y, whom you’ve watched time and again vote to support the interests of the people in your district, must leave as well. Term limits have effectively suppressed your right to vote freely for the person of your choice.
Finally, term limits are elitist. They assume an electorate that is not smart enough to vote out bad legislators, and must have it done for them, like cutting up food for a child. Look, I get it--you're angry, you think all politicians are liars who never do anything. But don't fall for the term limits lie. It won't fix everything. In fact it won't really fix anything. Only voting for intelligent, committed public servants will. And you'll have to do the research to decide who merits your vote.
Comments
Post a Comment