daylinleach

[daylinleach]

Why Term Limits are a Terrible Idea

We’ve all heard the cliche that there are “lies, damn lies, and statistics”. Well, in the context of political reform, there are blunders, meshugganah blunders and term limits (I’m quite sure this cliche will soon sweep the nation).

Term limits for elected officials are often sold as some sort of cure-all for all of the myriad flaws in our political system. If we just sweep out the old and bring in “fresh blood” every few years, congress and state legislatures will no longer be gridlocked. They will pass more laws, all of them good and they will be less corrupt, stupid, reactionary or Communist (depending on your ideology) poorly dressed and just plain weird.

Put another way, term limits will force us to elect young, bright, pristine, honest politicians we are lucky to have, who will all, within a few years, turn into crusty, crooked, worthless dingleberries we must get rid of. Every single one of them.

This argument is false. It is nothing more than wishful thinking. Having served in both the House and Senate of a legislature for 18 years, I had occasion to observe hundreds of colleagues. Some, on both sides of the aisle, were brilliant, sincere and insightful. Others were fine. Not stand-outs, but did their jobs and represented their constituents satisfactorily. And of course, there were some who were either dumb as a tub of prunes or so corrupt that I counted myself lucky when they didn’t actually rob me at gun-point right on the senate floor.

The reality is that things like intelligence, diligence, integrity, etc., are character traits, innate to an individual. An honest person comes to the legislature as an honest person, and in my experience, is still an honest person when they leave the legislature, even if that is decades later. Conversely, it won’t take much Googling to find a long list of first or second term lawmakers who have been sent up-river upon conviction of all manner of crimes. There is just no evidence that replacing one legislator with another simply because the incumbent has been in office for a set number of years, will bring us a better legislator. In fact, it seems at least equally likely that we will be trading a very good legislator for a very bad one.

Given that term limits confer no obvious gain, they become difficult to justify when balanced against the clear losses these limits bring.

First, putting the character of the individual lawmaker aside, we indisputably lose experience, which can be very valuable. Institutional knowledge is often hugely helpful in helping us avoid the mistakes we’ve made in the past. For example, if we were debating a lengthy commitment to staying in Afghanistan, I think it would be helpful to have people in the room, and voting on committees that can speak to what we did right and wrong in Vietnam or Iraq. It’s one thing to read an editorial in the newspaper. It’s quite another to hear from someone who was there and can say “these are the mistakes we made back then and this is why we made them”.

A frequent argument that is made in response to this point is that “we don’t want to have career politicians”. I find this argument to be like nails on a blackboard. And to be clear, I don’t like nails on a chalkboard, even a little bit. Nobody would ever show up at a hospital and say “I don’t want a career neurosurgeon. I want my operation to be done by someone who dabbles in it.” Similarly, when it matters to them, nobody asks for the lawyer, or accountant, or mechanic with the least experience. It is only when it comes to making the laws that govern society, often with life and death consequences, that knowing stuff is considered a negative.

The second, and perhaps even more important reason that term limits are bad is that they are blatantly anti-democratic.

I have never been to Forest County Pennsylvania in my life. I say that in a proud and boastful way. Forest County, feels the same about me. In fact, I’m told there’s a whole festival dedicated to me never having been there. There is a parade, marching bands, and some game that involves shooting children out of a cannon, all in celebration of my never having set foot in within their borders. Although, the festival has been going on for decades longer than I’ve been alive, which is odd. But hey! That’s Forest County!

If, as a state legislator, I had voted for term limits, I would have, in effect, been saying, “I have never been to Forest County, and I know nothing about it. But I do know better than they do who they should have as their representative. And even if they want to keep the one they have, I am telling them they can’t, whether they like it or not.”

My ego may be big (huge, gargantuan, corpulent, choose any word you like) but it’s not that big. Who am I to tell other people who I have never met and know nothing about who they should choose to represent them? The good people of Forest County should decide for themselves who they want and what the criteria for so choosing should be. If I think my legislator has been in office to long, fine. I should try to vote them out. But others are perfectly capable of doing their own analysis on their own terms. And if they have what they consider to be an amazing legislator, they should absolutely have the right to keep them.

Term limits were a fad for a while. But they didn’t deliver the promised benefits and often led to pissy 28-year olds who had been in government for all of 3 years being Speaker of the House and running the whole show. This has resulted in an end to new states enacting term limits and six states actually repealing them. It simply makes far more sense to elect or defeat politicians based on their qualifications, character and record than on artificial limits on terms.

And now, screw it. I’m off to Forest County!