When Massachusetts U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy died in 2009, he was fondly recalled for his finely honed skills as a legislator. Commentators and members of Congress on both sides of the aisle noted the abundance of laws that had landed on the books in his 47 years in the Senate that he had initiated, influenced or helped shape.
If Kennedy had been term-limited — say, to two terms in the Senate — he would have been out of office at the end of 1976.
It’s election season, with municipal elections coming up in Pennsylvania and other states in two weeks and, of course, the presidential election coming up next year. In the weeks and months ahead, we’re bound to hear the magic words “term limits” tumble out of many a mouth and be pounded out on many a laptop, in the belief that term limits will fix what ails our politics.
And it is an undeniably seductive idea — Mr. Smith goes to Washington, or Harrisburg, or Columbus, or Albany, or some other capitol, humbly and thoughtfully deliberates the issues of the day, votes on what is “right” based on fundamental common sense and then returns to his workaday life in his hometown.
The likely result of term limits, however, would likely be something somewhat less sunny and idealistic than this scenario. Not possessing the skills coming from a long stretch in public service, Mr. Smith would probably be easily rolled by lobbyists, members of the executive branch and bureaucrats. There’s every likelihood, too, that rather than returning to his hometown when his time is up, Mr. Smith would try to use some of the knowledge he gleaned as a lawmaker to join the lobbying ranks or find employment in some other lucrative line of work.
Jamelle Bouie, a columnist for The New York Times, recently pointed out that “legislating is real work that demands actual expertise. Any elected official who hopes to do anything serious must build relationships with other members, as well as learn the ins and outs of writing laws. This takes time, the same way that expertise in any profession takes time.”
Bouie also said, “Term limits would, by design, force competent, conscientious and talented legislators out of office, depriving the legislature of their skills for no reason other than a knee-jerk distaste for long-serving lawmakers.”
Above all, at a moment when democracy itself has been bruised and battered, term limits would limit the choices that voters have. It’s been said time and time again, and it’s true — the best way to limit the terms of lawmakers is through the ballot box. If you think a veteran lawmaker is too old, has run out of gas, or is just a bum, then vote for an opposing candidate. On the other hand, if you believe a veteran lawmaker has done a stellar job, has a comprehensive understanding of the legislative process and has shown a keen understanding of the issues you care about, then keep them.
In a democracy, every elected official is subject to term limits by his or her own constituents.
— Uniontown Herald-Standard via AP
