TERM LIMITS

[El Paso Eagle]

Helping my son with a project. Your input and comments would be appreciated

[KRAM1]

So, good question.  When I worked as the CFO of a political think tank, this discussion came up fairly often.  It is a much more "tricky" answer than most people think and there are many variables that a lot of folks do not consider when they shout..."we must have term limits...if it is good for the President it is good for every other elected official".  Well, is it really?  I have been opposed to term limits for quite some time, but my thinking is beginning to shift a bit watching the clown show that is Washington DC these days..especially in the House.  But, that is a different topic altogether.  Without stating opinion, let me give you a couple of items to think about when considering term limits:

1.  It takes an elected official (I will use elected official for both a congressman and a senator unless otherwise noted) a minimum of two years to actually "find their way around" on Capital Hill.  You can see this by watching most newly elected officials as they head to Capital Hill telling all their voters what big things they will do and how they will vote for this or that and how they will immediately write legislation to "fix" this or that. Once arriving on Capital Hill they pretty much disappear...except on social media where they try to stay relevant to their own voters.  But, inside Capital Hill, they can barely find the restrooms.  They are usually scrambling to find more senior members of the House and Senate to "hitch their wagons to" so they can have any voice at all.

2.  Two terms for a House member is way way too few if you want the House to actually balance the Senate with 6-year terms.  With a House member only getting 4 years max the Senate would dominate them like adults taking on teenagers. So, one must consider more eligible terms for House members...like a max of six two-year terms to match the Senate's two six-year terms. But, that would be up to date.

3.  Now, think and consider...what if "your guy or your lady" is doing a bang-up job and is recognized as an impactful and successful elected official and has shown the ability to create consensus across the aisle and actually get things done??? Is this a person you would want to see "term-limited out"?  Most of the most vocal proponents of term limits just want5 the "other side's" elected officials out...their elected officials are great, right? Just something to think about.

4.  While incumbent elected officials have the advantage in general elections, we actually already do have term limits.  It is called the ballot box. Sure, lots of proponents of term limits scoff at this and point to very long-term members of the House and Senate.  But, are these long-term members being re-elected by their constituents every 2 or 6 years? If so, their constituents must think they are doing a great job for them...at least the majority in the home district. I know...I know, but it is something to think about as term-limits would show "no mercy" no matter how "good" or "bad" and elected official was doing his/her job.

5. Now one very few proponents of term limits ever consider...who would actually be running the country while all these newbie senators and congressmen get their feet on the ground and actually figure out how things really work in DC?  Well, the paid bureaucrats would, of course. The ones who actually write most of the pieces of legislation their respective senators and congressmen sponsor, respond to the vast majority of constituent inquiries, attend many of the committee hearings in order to inform their respective elected official what actually went on in the meeting, set their respective elected officials schedules, tell their elected official who they should and should not see, should and should not be sponsoring bills with, etc., etc., etc. You set term limits too tight with too few years and we end up with a congress and senate run by people who do not answer to the voters at all. How does this happen?  Well, because a good many of the staffers employed by elected officials are holdovers from the previous elected official. Why? Because they know their way around Capital Hill and have experience while their newbie senator/congressman can hardly find the restroom or congressional lunchroom. This especially happens when the same party retains the seat in the general election.  And, believe it or not...sometimes a few staffers stay on even if the opposing party wins.  They "help with the transition" of the new staff, and boom...that transition lasts longer than one might think in some cases.  So, if you really really like non-elected bureaucrats running both the Hose and Senate...vote term limits in and make them really short.

OK, enough to think about.  I am guessing you may not have thought about all this when thinking "hey, term limits would solve everything...drain the swamp", etc. Maybe you have...I had not.  And, once I started seriously considering this...and many other items I have not mentioned here, it started to make my opinion on term limits get harder and harder to conceptualize and conclude.  Still don't know what the best answer is to this question, but I am giving it more thought these days.

Anyway, PSA over....food for thought only.....

 

[untbowler]

Think 10 yr in service should be enough or limit to 2 Senate Terms and 5 House Terms, pathetic seeing certain districts where they have the same member for 30+ yrs and yet situation is no better

[NT93]

I voted No Term Limits, but I’m not all-in on that opinion.  Obviously if an elected official is doing a great job it seems ridiculous to limit him or her.  On the other hand, you have some who need to be shown the door before their term is over.  Tough question and I can see both sides of the argument.

[97and03]

Term limits are a tough one. They look great in theory but do have drawbacks.
I think the argument that permanent staffers will have all the power is somewhat correct but really they already do in many cases. Professional staffers in the congressional committees have a great deal of influence. Really committees are where a lot of the power is at (if not most of it). Seniority plays a large role in committee assignments for congressmen so teen limits would affect that as well. Not arguing for or against on that one. 

Whether term limits are even enacted or not, they need to continue to strengthen restrictions on congressmen going straight into lobbying. I think term limits would make that worse without stronger ethics rules. 
 

I tend to favor voting as the best term limit but would be open to it if done thoughtfully. I wonder if it would drive down voter turnout in any way. We already struggle with turnout in midterm elections and maybe people would just shrug  and think “well s/he only has two years either way so I guess it doesn’t matter.”

[El Paso Eagle]

7 hours ago, 97and03 said:

Term limits are a tough one. They look great in theory but do have drawbacks.
I think the argument that permanent staffers will have all the power is somewhat correct but really they already do in many cases. Professional staffers in the congressional committees have a great deal of influence. Really committees are where a lot of the power is at (if not most of it). Seniority plays a large role in committee assignments for congressmen so teen limits would affect that as well. Not arguing for or against on that one. 

Whether term limits are even enacted or not, they need to continue to strengthen restrictions on congressmen going straight into lobbying. I think term limits would make that worse without stronger ethics rules. 
 

I tend to favor voting as the best term limit but would be open to it if done thoughtfully. I wonder if it would drive down voter turnout in any way. We already struggle with turnout in midterm elections and maybe people would just shrug  and think “well s/he only has two years either way so I guess it doesn’t matter.”

This is a good point. Many of the elected officials depend way too much for others to do the research and help form their "opinions." If you watch coverage where staffers are not there and the elected officials (either side) have to ask or be asked questions it can get very uncomfortable and at time outright hilarious 

[97and03]

2 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

This is a good point. Many of the elected officials depend way too much for others to do the research and help form their "opinions." If you watch coverage where staffers are not there and the elected officials (either side) have to ask or be asked questions it can get very uncomfortable and at time outright hilarious 

To be honest, professional staffers are not the bad guy necessarily. In my work I have interacted with many and the overwhelming majority are dedicated and smart professionals. They are subject matter experts and usually bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to their offices or committees. 
The congressmen that I have met...not so much...

[El Paso Eagle]

3 minutes ago, 97and03 said:

To be honest, professional staffers are not the bad guy necessarily. In my work I have interacted with many and the overwhelming majority are dedicated and smart professionals. They are subject matter experts and usually bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to their offices or committees. 
The congressmen that I have met...not so much...

I have heard before, but have no actual knowledge, that many of these "professional: staffers move from working for candidates from one party to the other more than most would thing. 

 

[97and03]

4 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

I have heard before, but have no actual knowledge, that many of these "professional: staffers move from working for candidates from one party to the other more than most would thing. 

 

Not sure about that really. Also there is a difference between office staffers and committee staffers. Office staffers are beholden to individual congressmen and committee staffers support the committee in general and especially committee leadership. They are usually a mix of some from the parties and some more permanent staff. At least that is what I think it is, but I admit that is not my area of expertise. 
 

[97and03]

7 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

I have heard before, but have no actual knowledge, that many of these "professional: staffers move from working for candidates from one party to the other more than most would thing. 

 

 

Just now, 97and03 said:

Not sure about that really. Also there is a difference between office staffers and committee staffers. Office staffers are beholden to individual congressmen and committee staffers support the committee in general and especially committee leadership. They are usually a mix of some from the parties and some more permanent staff. At least that is what I think it is, but I admit that is not my area of expertise. 
 

Actually when I think about what you said, I would be ok with the staffers not having hard core political leanings and just offering neutral advice and letting the political types choose from the best options. 

[MeanGreenTeeth]

Yes.  We absolutely need term limits.  12 years max (2 senate terms or 6 house terms).  The fact that we have folks who've been in congress since the 70s and 80s is shameful.   Politics shouldn't be a career.  It should be something people do for a few years to help their community (or district, state, country, etc.)  Folks act like there will be some huge experience gap, but honestly, it's not all that complicated and most of our current legislators are more about showboating than doing serious work.  Maybe if they weren't trying to get  re-elected all the time they could actually focus on what's best for the country and less on what was going to extend their career.

[CMJ]

Being in a state with term limits, they don't really prevent career politicians.  They just change what position they run for.

 

One of the local City Councilmen in LA was in the State Assembly before being termed out.  He's about to be termed out of City Hall, but he's the leading contender to be elected as one of LA County's Supervisors.

 

His story is not particularly unique.

Edited May 26, 2020 by CMJ