No Uncertain Terms

Newt Gingrich no friend of Congressional term limits

2011-12-16T12:15:00.002-05:00

With the rise of Newt Gingrich in the polls, I have been repeatedly asked where he stands on term limits.

After all, didn't he win the House back in 1994 with his Contract with America which included term limits? Yes, but that's only part of the story.

In 1991, before the Contract with America, Newt Gingrich called term limits "a terrible idea." However later when nearly every state with a citizen initiative process had term limited their U.S. Congress members and state representatives, Newt added this "terrible idea" to his platform and indeed it was the most popular plank.

Once in power, Newt did everything possible to avoid passage and, worse, actively schemed to undo the work done by the citizens in the states who had collected millions of signatures and cast millions of votes.

Newt appointed Florida Congressman Bill McCollum to be his point man on the issue. Newt and Bill pushed a politician-friendly 12-year term limits amendment bill that blatantly upended the mostly 6- and 8-year term limits passed by 23 states. But that was only part one of the betrayal.

Newt was and is a brilliant political schemer. Gingrich and McCollum's insistence on a 12-year bill in direct defiance to the national term limits movement was part of a proliferation of term limits bills. This proliferation permitted every Congress member to support a bill and go back home and brag about their vote to their constituents, while remaining confident that none would ever pass. In all there were 11 different term limits bills introduced, four of which came to a vote. A tough vote under any circumstances, by dividing the votes between the different bills, the people's goose was cooked.

The attitude of Reps. Gingrich and McCollum were probably best summed up by another Contract with American beneficiary Rep. Dick Armey of Texas who famously said that "If we Republicans can straighten out the House . . . then I think maybe the nation's desire for term limits will be diminished."

Hardly. Recent polling shows some 78 percent of Americans -- including 84 percent of Republicans and 74 of Democrats and 74 percent of independents -- support Congressional term limits.

Today, Gingrich is at least up-front about his opposition to term limits. In September in Orlando, he told U.S. Term Limits Board Member Rick Shepherd, essentially, "We tried that and it didn't work." Sure, Newt, whatever.

So when I am asked if lifetime professional politician-turned-lobbyist-turned presidential candidate Newt Gingrich is the Patron Saint of Term Limits, I answer: Hell no.

Term limits make their mark in Missouri

2011-12-16T12:03:00.013-05:00

Although it is not its intention, a new 15-page report, “The Impact and Implications of Term Limits in Missouri” by David C. Valentine, provides data that highlights the success of term limits in that state’s legislature.

In 1992, Missouri citizens collected signatures and put an initiative on the ballot that limited both state representatives and senators to 8 years in office. Voters approved the constitutional amendment with 75 percent of the vote and a May 2011 poll suggests 77 percent of Missourians continue to support the law. It went into full effect in 2003.

Citizens can easily see how term limits have resulted in more competitive elections and regular rotation in office. But Valentine’s study adds some color to our more casual observation:

First, term limits in Missouri have largely erased the surge in tenure that marked the later 20th Century. This nation’s founders believed that regular rotation in office was essential for democracy to operate and indeed for the first century and a half of our history their vision operated in our state houses and even the U.S. Congress. But in the latter half of the 20th century, coinciding with the growth of government, entrenched incumbency became the norm in nearly all political bodies of any size. The classic example is the U.S. House, where today there is a roughly 95 probability probability of an incumbent winning a race for their own seat. But in Missouri, as the study shows, the average tenure has shrunk to pre-surge norms.

Second, in the Missouri House, rotation in office due to term limits has created a more representative body comprising a far broader range of experience. The data show that previous legislative experience has been significantly reduced, an obvious result of term limits.

Third, the intended division between the upper and lowers houses of the legislature have been maintained and improved. While the House has been transformed into a far more representative body, the percentage of the Senate with significant legislative experience remains very high, as many or most Senators serve first in the House. Hence, the balance – previously skewed toward professional politicians – has swung back more toward the center, balancing the value of experience and improving the representation and participation of the citizens.

The result of this transformation has been positive. While every legislature – like every marriage -- is dysfunctional in its own way, some state governments are certainly better than others. The American Legislative Exchange Council – no friend of term limits – grades the states on a dozen or so result-oriented metrics. In the most recent score card, the top of the list is crowded with states with term limited legislatures. Missouri is ranked 9.

In spite of all this, the author of the University of Missouri study argues forcefully that the reductions in tenure and legislative experience in Missouri are defects of term limits. In effect he is arguing that legislative term limits are a failure because they limit terms of legislators! He suggests this is an “unintended consequence” of term limits.

Beyond the helpful data, the article consists of pretty standard rhetoric opposing term limits which will be helpful to the politicians in Jefferson City looking to hold on to their jobs. Given its timing and style, this is surely the intended purpose of the report.

Fortunately, the voters of Missouri have different ideas. They voted for the term limits and believe time has validated their decision. When polled in May on why they believed state politicians want to weaken term limits, a full 78 percent -- including big majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents – said “keeping themselves in power.” Only 9 percent said “achieving better government."

Sounds like rotation is office is precisely the consequence voters intended.

Huntsman: "We need term limits in Congress"

2011-11-24T14:37:00.008-05:00

The latest presidential contender to weigh in on Congressional term limits is former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. He mentioned his support for the idea as an aside during the Nov. 22 CNN presidential debate on foreign policy.

“We need a Washington that works,” said Huntsman. “We have a Congress that can’t even figure out how to balance our budget. They need term limits, by the way. We’ve gotta get our house in order…"

I cheered, surprised. But apparently his advocacy of term limits is not new.

“Governor Huntsman has been an advocate of term limits since his time as governor of Utah," Joel Sawyer, Huntsman’s South Carolina director, told the Nashua Telegraph. “He believes they’re needed in Congress, because much like his tax plan that eliminates corporate welfare and loopholes, it would go a long way toward breaking up entrenched special interests and ending crony capitalism."

Of course it would. Huntsman paired his support for term limits with a lifetime ban on lobbying after a Congress member has been term limited. This package has become part of his stump speech in New Hampshire.

But he went further in an interview with RealClearPolitics.com this on Nov. 21. Not only do we need term limits, but Huntsman sees a role for the U.S. president in instituting them.

“We need term limits in Congress,” he said. “We need restrictions on members of Congress who then go into lobbying. We've got some structural problems here that make it very difficult to do the work of the people. And to have a president who's willing to use the bully pulpit in identifying and pointing out those issues, as well, would be a very good thing in this country.”

Huntsman joins former Gov. Gary Johnson – the sole signatory of the U.S. Term Limits presidential pledge – in calling for a presidential role in establishing term limits on Congress. Rep. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum have also spoken fondly of the popular reform, while Gov. Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman and Newt Gingrich are opposed.

Turner win in NY a victory for Congressional term limits

2011-09-14T06:30:00.011-04:00

This morning's press release tells the story:

SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 -- U.S. Term Limits President Philip Blumel celebrated the victory of Bob Turner to the U.S. House in yesterday’s special election in New York’s 9th as a victory for the cause of Congressional term limits.

"We welcome yet another new face in Washington who is committed to opening up the Congress to citizen legislators like himself," said Blumel. Turner is a retired media executive of 40 years.

A Constitutional amendment bill has been introduced by Rep. David Schweikert (R-AZ) in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) in the U.S. Senate which limit members of the House to three terms and Senators to two terms in office. Turner is a signatory of a U.S. Term Limits pledge to support such legislation.

"Turner’s upset election in is just one more shock wave to hit the power structure in D.C. People are demanding an end to the entitled political culture in our nation’s capitol and passage of the term limits Constitutional Amendment would be a great leap towards that goal,” Blumel said. “We look forward to seeing Rep. Turner’s name on the growing list of cosponsors for the term limits amendment."

To sign an online petition in favor of the term limits amendment, go here.

Term limits continues to enjoy broad, bi-partisan support with 78% of U.S. registered voters in favor of congressional term limits according to a September 2010 FoxNews Public Opinion Dynamics poll of registered voters. The poll showed 74% of Democrats polled favored term limits with 84% of Republicans indicating support, with overall support jumping 8% from a March 2009 poll.

Passage of the Constitutional Amendment requires a 2/3 vote of both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives followed by passage in 38 states.

Rick Perry: "I am not a fan of term limits"

2011-09-07T06:20:00.008-04:00

With a term limits amendment in both houses of the Congress picking up sponsorship and polls showing unprecedented support for the idea among voters, term limits may become an important issue of the 2012 presidential campaign. In fact, presidential support could be a decisive factor in getting the amendment through Congress.

So far, presidential candidates have been largely mum. Gov. Gary Johnson has signed the U.S. Term Limits presidential term limits pledge, committing to advocate term limits in his campaign and, if elected, as president. But the others, nothing, until now.

Gov. Rick Perry broke the silence this week with his announcement that "I am not a fan of term limits ... I am very passionate about this." He made the announcement, with a convoluted defense of his position, in response to a citizen who asked if he'd help get the amendment passed.

See the video here.

Note how he pivots to another popular amendment to recover, as the audience is not on Perry's side here. But, of course, support for term limits and a balance budget amendment are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the two reforms made up the core of Sen. Rand Paul's successful 2010 campaign for the U.S. Senate. The positions helped Paul catapault over his establishment rival.

Perhaps something similar may happen in the presidential race too.

To let the Congress know you are a fan of Congressional term limits, please sign the online petition here. Thanks!

County politicians ask Florida Supreme Court to abolish voter-approved county term limits

2011-09-07T06:08:00.004-04:00

It's official. Broward County politicians, hiding behind their attorneys, are appealing the recent appellate court decision that deemed county commission term limits constitutional. Yes, county term limits are going to the Florida Supreme Court.

Bill Scherer, acting for sitting Broward commissioner John Rodstrom among others, launched the appeal after losing his case at the appellate court level on Aug. 10. The appellate court had decided -- unanimously -- that home rule charter counties do indeed have the right to customize their county commissions as they have long done.

It is for this reason that some charter counties have seven commissioners and some have five, or even 13. Some have single member districts and some are elected from the county at-large -- and some have a blend of the two. Some have a strong mayor system and some have a commission-manager structure. Some counties offer nominal compensation to cover expenses and others offer high salaries with benefits. Some charter counties (10) have term limits and some don't (10).

In home rule counties, all charter changes such as these are approved by the voters in a referendum, sometimes by a citizen's initiative after collecting thousands of signatures from their neighbors. Florida's county term limits were adopted by lopsided votes of the people, including 80% voter approval in Broward.

The August decision by the 4th District Court of Appeals upheld Broward County term limits, argued that this traditional understanding of home rule is correct. The people won; the politicians lost. It should have ended there.

But politicians grasp for power like a drowning man gasps for air. Scherer and his cronies argue in their appeal to the Supreme Court that the people cannot be trusted to alter their charter in this way. Instead, county commissioners should be treated just like constitutional officers -- such as the tax collector and property appraisers -- which are state creations over which the Supreme Court has said people have less say.

This is seen as a weak argument, as constitutional officers are distinct from county commissioners are treated in a different section of the state constitution. The quite readable 4th district decision makes this distinction as clear as day.

Meanwhile, the desperate Broward political clan is tossing 2012 county elections across the state into confusion in their last bid to hold on to the thrones that have enriched and, sadly but evidently, corrupted them.

"An Act of Self-Defense" offers literal take on term limits revolution

2011-08-15T22:33:00.007-04:00

Readers of Erne Lewis' "An Act of Self-Defense" who have also read Vince Flynn's "Term Limits" will not be able to help comparing the two. For one thing, both novels revolve around frustrated Americans who target -- literally -- Congress members in a revolutionary attempt to get the federal government under control.

In Lewis' version, the four-person rebel cadre call themselves the Term Limits Revolution and threaten to kill one Congress member per day until a 8-year term limits amendment is passed and sent to the states for ratification. Once they do that, the TLR promised to stand down and the states are free to ratify or reject it.

In the TLR's initial threat to Congress, they argue "Thomas Jefferson believed the failure to include term limits in the Constitution was a fatal error. He predicted another revolution would be necessary to regain the individual rights lost to the power-loving politicians who would, over time, increase their power at the cost of our liberty. Jefferson could not have foreseen that the federal government would today be capable of tracking our every move and communication..."

This last sentence provides much of the suspense that makes this Lewis' first novel a page-turner. The book shows, rather dramatically, how the Patriot Act and other Congressional excesses can be used not only to track down legitimate threats like the TLR, but also misused to harrass innocent Americans by overly aggressive law enforcement or, worse, for purely political reasons.

In one dramatic example, a no-knock warrantless raid on the president of a national term limits advocacy organization -- yikes! -- goes awry with tragic results. And it turns out the target of the raid had no connection or knowledge of the TLR.

Lewis has done his homework, both on the term limits issue and on the new-fangled powers government has usurped by exploiting people's fear of Muslim terrorists following 9/11.

Much like with the Flynn book, the reader finds himself identifying a little too closely with the revolutionaries. Fortunately, in the real world, we may indeed need a term limits revolution, but not one armed with guns and bombs.

COURT: Florida's county term limits are constitutional!

2011-08-10T14:04:00.006-04:00

Today the Florida 4th District Court of Appeals reversed a lower court decision that had overturned voter-approved term limits in Broward County.

In other words, the court has ruled that county commissioner term limits are constitutional in Florida.

Yes, Florida’s county commissioner term limits laws are safe (for now) from attack by local politicians via the courts!

It was expected that county term limits would win at the Florida Supreme Court level, but there were concerns about the appellate court case because it looked at a narrower question than home rule and the right of citizens to impose term limits at the county level. The fear was that local politicians would try to use an adverse appellate decision to void local term limits laws before the case got to the Supreme Court. Two Palm Beach County commissioners, for instance, announced they planned to do just that.

But no more.

Today marks a great victory for the voters and a loss for professional politicians.

Thanks to the Broward County attorney’s office for doing a great job in defending the people’s will and all the term limits supporters around the state that rallied behind their popular term limits laws.

For the full story as it unfolded, see the blog www.pbctermlimits.com.

IT'S HAPPENING! Term limits amendment filed in the U.S. House

2011-07-10T13:14:00.014-04:00

On Thursday, Rep. Joe Walsh of Illinois (pictured), Rep. David Schweikert of Arizona and Jeff Duncan of South Carolina introduced a term limits amendment bill in the U.S. House of Representatives, a companion to Sen. DeMint's term limits bill in the Senate.

This means that for the first time since the early 1990s, there is a serious term limits bill introduced in both houses with cosponsorship. With polling for term limits at its highest level ever, the time is right.

Like the DeMint bill, the amendment would limit the terms of house members to six years and senators to 12.

"If we have any hope of ending business as usual in D.C., we must first change the process," Walsh said in his announcement. "Term limits encourage competitive elections and a consistent influx of new leaders bringing a range of different experiences and new ideas to Congress. Keeping the same Members in Congress year after year will yield the same results – runaway spending and a sky-high debt that has led the United States to the verge of insolvency. It’s time to put an end to this. It’s time to bring in new Members with fresh ideas, ready and eager to serve. It’s time to pass a term limit Amendment."

To pass, the bill must be approved two-thirds of the Congress. This is no easy task. Please help!

+ Please sign our online petition in favor of Congressional term limits and pass a link on to your friends, family and associates.

+ Ask your representative in Congress -- and his or her opponents -- to sign the U.S. Term Limits pledge to support the amendment. Traditionally, candidates speak fondly of term limits until they get elected. The pledge locks in their support once they are the incumbents!

+ Make a contribution to U.S. Term Limits. Founded in 1991, we are the oldest and largest national term limits organization with the experience and resources to get the job done.

After passing Congress, the bill has to pass three-fourths of the states, but this is a much lower hurdle. The problem is getting the Congress to limit itself. That will require igniting the passion of the 78 percent of Americans that tell pollsters they support Congressional term limits.

This new bill is the starting gun in the most important political battle of a generation. Let's take it all the way to the finish line.

Citizens demand revote on El Paso term limits

2011-06-25T13:06:00.004-04:00

As reported earlier, some commissioners in El Paso County, Colorado, appear to have used a cleverly worded ballot question to snatch another term in office and the annual $87,300 and other perks that come with it.

Since waking up to the ruse, citizens have been agitating for a second, more straightforward vote to clear up the confusion. Not surprisingly, the perpetrators have tried to avoid this, hoping with time this issue would just go away.

It hasn't.

Instead the clamor has grown to the point where the commission agreed to hold a formal public hearing on the subject Monday, June 27. Then, the issue will appear as an agenda item on Thursday's county commission meeting. Citizens are urged to attend both.

The citizens have two allies on the commission, as Darryl Glenn and Peggy Littleton agree a second vote should be held as soon as possible. But they need one more vote to refer a new ballot question, as county citizen initiatives are not permitted in Colorado.

According to the Colorado Springs Gazette, Commissioner Sallie Clark has asked the county attorney Bill Louis whether the commission has the power to simply rescind the Nov. 2 vote and start over.

The stonewalling is over. This week the commission is all ears. Please take advantage of this opportunity to tell them how you feel.

For more information, see the new citizen website at http://www.elpasocountytermlimits.com/

CLASS STRUGGLE: Politicians versus the People in Missouri

2011-05-03T22:11:00.015-04:00

Please help me out with my math here. Something is just not adding up.

In a 2011 vote of the Missouri State Senate, 88 percent of the legislators approved an amendment to abolish their voter-approved eight-year term limit and replace it with a cozier 16-year limit.

In a 2011 poll released this week, 77 percent of Missourians said they oppose precisely this change. Please note this is nearly the same percentage (75 percent) that voted to approve the current term limits law back in 1992.

How can these lopsided figures be reconciled? Maybe the political calculation is all too clear.

There aren't many issues in which the special interests of politicians as a class conflict so directly with the interests and demands of the people. But term limits is one of these.

The respondents in the new poll sum it up well. A full 78 percent of the Missourians polled said that lawmakers who voted to lengthen the terms are "primarily interested in keeping themselves in power," including 65 percent of Democrats, 78 percent of Republicans and 89 percent of independents.

U.S. Term Limits (USTL) commissioned the poll from Pulse Opinion Research conducted among 500 likely Missouri voters, and is now urging members of the state House to reject the proposal, SJR 12, which has already passed the Senate.

The amendment passed the Senate 29 to 4. The stalwart four are worth mentioning for putting the people's interests above their own: State Sens. Jane Cunningham, Jack Goodman, Will Kraus and Brian Nieves. If you know them, thank them for their stand.

If you live in Missouri, let your state representative hear from you right away. You can send an email to Missouri House Speaker Steven Tilley here.

Currently, the Missouri state constitution limits state senators to serve two four-year terms in office and state representatives to four two-year terms. They were enacted in 1992 with 75 percent of the vote, going into effect in 2002. No one was limited by this law until 2010.

The Senate is wasting its time and the people’s money by forcing a vote. Even if their amendment rolling back term limits is placed on the ballot, the people will crush it.

(The picture above is from a Missouri Tea Party, 2010.)

Presidential candidate Gov. Gary Johnson: "I'm a believer in term limits, absolutely"

2011-04-17T19:50:00.008-04:00

Now that Sen. Jim DeMint has reintroduced his Term Limits for All amendment with 10 cosponsors, the issue is back on the national stage and we need to hear where all national candidates -- including presidential candidates -- stand.

First to speak out has been former Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico, who is a presidential candidate in all but paperwork (although this too might change on April 21).

Johnson includes term limits as a theme in all his stump speeches. Although mild mannered in person, he is remembered as the governor who vetoed 750 bills and was willing to speak out on controversial issues, such as marijuana legalization.

In typical Johnson fashion, he proclaimed on the Colbert Report television program as early as last May that "I was term limited, Stephen, but i'm a believer in term limits, absolutely. I think politicians will do things they wouldn't ordinarily do when they are term limited, and I probably come under that category. Would I have been as bold?"

DeMint bill is back -- with 10 cosponsors!

2011-04-15T09:41:00.015-04:00

For the first time in over a decade, term limits has reemerged as a major issue in Washington DC. Yesterday, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) reintroduced his amendment for Congressional term limits -- this time with 10 cosponsors on day one! -- and a House companion is expected to be introduced imminently.

This shot across the bow of Washington's entrenched incumbency is occurring in an environment where some 78 percent of Americans are telling pollsters they want Congressional term limits. It is a bipartisan call, with 84 percent Republican support and 74 from both Democrats and independents.

Americans laughed derisively at Congress after a week of political rodeo in which the parties locked horns, even threatening to shut down the government, over less than $1 billion in budget cuts, according to the Government Accounting Office.

In a body based on seniority in which special interest-backed incumbents almost never lose elections, what else could be expected? Sure, they put on a good show for their respective bases by battling each other at the margins, but in the end the leadership in both parties and in the House and Senate have the same job: they have to keep their big special interest constituencies on the government dole.

The budget battle underscores the need for institutional reform, for term limits. And the DeMint bill is real term limits, mandating a maximum three consecutive terms in the House and two in the Senate. The leadership of both parties and their lap dogs in the media will try to ignore this bill. We cannot let them.

Please take action today:

1) Sign the online petition here supporting the DeMint 3/2 term limits bill.

2) Forward a link to this page to everyone you know.

3) Support U.S. Term Limits with a financial contribution to help promote the bill.

As cosponsor Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) argued in an earlier post on this blog, the time is now for term limits. Let's push this issue to the top of our agendas and take advantage of an opportunity to change Washington forever.

Florida's anti-term limits trickster at it again

2011-03-04T19:43:00.008-05:00

He's back! Florida’s anti-term limits obsessive, Sen. Mike Bennett (R-Bradenton), has returned with a new scheme to weaken Florida’s term limits -- and it’s more devious than ever.

It has to be. Florida has 8-year legislative term limits written into their constitution and it requires a 60 percent vote in a popular referendum to change them. Given that 2009 polling suggests that some 79 percent of Florida voters like Florida’s term limits just the way they are, a straightforward bill is out of the question.

Sen. Bennett knows this from experience. That’s why last year he tried to tack an anti-term limits amendment to a popular bill to give tax breaks to veterans. That didn’t fly, so this year he has a new trick.

Just as in the past, the core of his proposed amendment (S 0300) is to weaken Florida’s term limits from eight to 12 years. The proposal would also lengthen the individual terms for House members from two to four years and for Senators from four to six.

But to sweeten the deal, the amendment would impose 12-year term limits also on county and municipal politicians.

Get it? This latest iteration of Sen. Bennett’s annual effort to weaken Florida term limits is really a pro-term limits bill! Sen. Bennett aims to sell this as an amendment to "improve" state limits and impose new-and-improved term limits all over the state. He's a term limits hero!

Scott Maxwell summed up it up perfectly in the Orlando Sentinel: “The hypocrisy of this idea is exceeded only by its audacity.”

Worse, the sugar Sen. Bennett is using to sell his snake oil is really only saccharine. This amendment, by imposing 12-year term limits on lower offices, would actually abolish the numerous existing 8-year term limits that exist on county commissions, mayors and city councils all over the state. Many or maybe most of these were put into effect by citizens collecting petitions in the hot summer sun and then approved by vast majorities at the ballot box.

"I'm not really focusing so much on extending the term limit from eight to 12 years,” said the author of the House companion to the Bennett bill, Rep. Rick Kriseman (D-St. Pete).

No kidding.

Rand Paul: The time is now for term limits

2011-03-02T08:23:00.011-05:00

The following is as good a case for Congressional term limits as any I have seen anywhere. That it was penned by a U.S. Senator is evidence that the issue has momentum at the federal level that we have not seen in over decade. This short essay is lifted from the Rand Paul for Senate website.

By U.S. Sen. Rand Paul

More than 95% of incumbent politicians win re-election to the U.S. Congress. Incumbents win re-election at a higher rate than they did in the Soviet Politburo.

With each successive term, politicians grow more and more distant from the people. It is hard to understand the plight of ordinary citizens when Congressman make over $170,000 per year, have health care benefits worth another $15,000 and become fully vested in a lucrative pension plan within a few years.

Some pundits like to remark that we already have term limits they’re called “elections.” This glib response ignores the fact that incumbent U.S. Senators start each election cycle with an average of $8 million dollars in the bank. The average U.S. Representative starts with over $1 million in the bank.

Most of this incumbent cash comes in the form of $5,000 checks from special interest groups that want federal contracts or federal favors.The challenger must raise his or her contributions largely from individuals, typically averaging under $100 per check.

Is it any wonder that incumbents win almost every election?

Long term incumbency leads to politicians who seem to care more about what is best for their career than what is best for their country.

After the vast enlargement of government under FDR, the country reacted fairly quickly to limit the terms of the President. Over 80% of the public, both Democrats and Republicans, favor term limits. What will it take to force a vote on Congressional term limits?

Today we are drowning in a sea of debt, teetering on financial ruin if we don’t get our house in order. Will this crisis be the one that finally convinces us as a nation to bring these politicians home, to replace them?

You can help Rand enact Congressional term limits. Please sign the online petition here and send this article to your friends, family and coworkers. You can use the SHARE tab atop this page to share this post via email, Facebook and Twitter. -- pb

Here's a term limits pledge with TEETH

2011-03-01T08:58:00.006-05:00

It is easy to forget that back in the early 1990s 23 states actually term limited their federal Congress members to (mostly) six or eight years in office in the House and 12 years in the Senate. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court shot these down term limits before they went into effect in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton, 1995.

In response, dozens of Congress members at that time pledged to self limit in a bow to the clear will of the voters. Some of these pledgers lived up to their word, including Sen. Jim DeMint, Sen. Tom Coburn and others.

However, many did not. When they still identified closely with the people, the Founder’s vision of regular rotation in office sounded like a great idea. But when the time came for them to relinquish the perks of power, these politicians all of a sudden discovered the value of “political experience.”

Hence, the self-limit pledges in many cases aided and abetted some crooked politicians or, at least, politicians who would eventually be corrupted by power. That is, these politicians got to benefit from their popular stand when their political position was new and precarious, but once they were established as part of Washington’s entrenched and largely unbeatable incumbency, they tossed their promise out the window.

Enter bonded term limits. A couple of years ago, a handful of gentlemen out of Pinehurst, NC, added a new twist to the self-limit idea. What if a politician signing a self-limit pledge actually signed a contract – a bond – that legally required them to pay big money to charity if they broke their word?

Now the self-limit idea had teeth, and the Alliance for Bonded Term Limits was born. In ABTL’s first foray in 2010, 22 candidates signed the ABTL bonded term limits pledge. The group was off to a good start.

Self-limiting – George Washington’s inspiring innovation – is back. Next time a candidate or politician is wooing voters with his support for term limits, ask him to sign on the dotted line!

For the candidate pledge kit and a short introductory video on the bonded term limits idea, go here.

New El Paso commissioner won't let term limit trick stand

2011-02-26T09:30:00.013-05:00

As noted in previous posts, the voters of El Paso County, Colorado, woke up Nov. 3 shocked to find they had voted to weaken their popular county term limits law. They were surprised because the deceptive ballot language used by the El Paso County politicians led voters to think they were voting for term limits!

New commissioner Darryl Glenn -- pictured above -- diplomatically points out "the community feels something underhanded has happened" and proposes that the controversy can be put to rest by placing the issue back on the November ballot in 2011. Simple enough. The reaction from the perps can best be paraphrased as "No way, buddy, we stole that election fair and square!"

However, the scammers do see some room for a compromise. Commissioners Amy Lathen and Dennis Hisey suggested they are open to putting it back on the ballot, but only in 2012 -- ensuring that they get to run for another term in the meantime!

Rand Paul: "I will vote to institute term limits"

2011-02-23T20:21:00.004-05:00

In a new book released this week, newly minted U.S. Senator Rand Paul tells the story of his surprising rise to national prominence in The Tea Party Goes to Washington.

Less surprising is Rand’s reiterating of his support for Congressional term limits amid his broader program for reforming – or, better, reducing – the federal government. At the end of the book he lays down several clear promises:

“I will vote to institute term limits. I will not vote for a tax increase. I will not vote for earmarks. I will not vote for an unbalanced budget. I will not vote to go to war without a formal declaration as our soldiers deserve and our Constitution demands.”

Certainly this is the Tea Party ethos in a nutshell.

In an interesting side story, Rand notes that a student asked him if his support of term limits required him to oppose veteran Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell. “I replied that, no, my support for term limits would mean even my father would have to come home and I wasn’t running against my father either.”

Congratulations Palm Beach County! Citizen-initiated term limits now in effect

2011-02-23T19:32:00.005-05:00

Nearly a decade ago, a handful of Palm Beach County citizens launched a citizen initiative effort to limit the terms of Palm Beach County Commissioners to eight years in office. Before the measure reached the 2002 ballot -- where 70% of county voters approved it -- over 150 citizens had joined the campaign, many spending week after week in the hot Florida sun to collect 65,000 signatures from their neighbors.

Their hard work paid off. After eight years, the term limits are now fully in effect. Two current commissioners are no longer eligible to run for re-election: Karen Marcus and Burt Aaronson. Ironically, three other commissioners that would otherwise be affected were indicted on corruption charges and involuntarily left office, underscoring the need for the term limits in the county.

Term limits encourage greater participation and transparency in government as well as regular, competitive elections. It is through the concern and perseverance of the citizenry that they have been achieved.

For a full 'Thank You' list of the citizens who made it happen, plus current news about the term limits law and – sadly -- the machinations of local politicians to circumvent it, see the new local blog here.

If you are local, while you're there you can answer the poll question in the upper right corner of the page: "Would you support a politician who works behind the scenes to overturn our voter-approved term limits law?" Let them know!

Thanks!

Egyptian protestors demand term limits

2011-02-20T21:23:00.002-05:00

When the Egyptian protestors first took to the streets of Egypt on January 25, they demanded presidential term limits and resignation of President Hosni Mubarak. Not long before Mubarak agreed to step down, a judiciary committee in Egypt agreed to accept the people’s demands and amended six articles of the country’s constitution – including article 76, putting terms limits on the presidency.

It was too little, too late.

Whereas term limits mandate rotation in office even in corrupt democracies, without them sham elections and entrenched leadership often can only be ousted via violence. Hence, the street had to take care of what constitutional rules and elections should have done.

Mubarak had served in office 30 years as ruler of Egypt. And he is not alone in the region. Muammar al-Gaddafi has ‘served’ Libya for 42 years, Sultan Qaboos biri Said Al Said has served Oman for 41 years, Omar al-Bashir in Sudan served for 21 years and Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen has served for 32 years.

That’s nearly as long as U.S. Rep. John Dingell (D-MI, 55 years), Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI, 51 years), Rep. Charles Rangell (D-NY, 40 years) and Rep. Bill Young (R-FL, 40 years) have 'served' us in Congress.

Our Founders recognized that rotation in office was essential for democracy to function and liberty be preserved. The world needs term limits, from the thrones of the Middle East to the U.S. Capitol.

El Paso voters wake up to term limits swindle

2010-11-15T07:53:00.012-05:00

Busted!

It appears many El Paso voters woke up surprised that they had voted to weaken their 8-year term limits law to a 12-year limit. Now there is a move afoot to reexamine that vote, in light of the fact that El Paso County appears to be the only place in America where term limits lost on Nov. 2.

Commissioner-elect Darryl Glenn told the Colorado Springs Gazette he plans to hold a public meeting in January to determine if the voters were fooled by the deceptive language of the referendum.

As reported earlier here, the El Paso politicians used a common titling and language trick that led voters to believe they were limiting terms, when in fact they were weakening them. County politicians acknowledged to the Colorado Springs Independent that they had chosen their wording "strategically." Then, after the ruse had come fully to light, they dug themselves a deeper hole by admitting to the Gazette they copied the scheme from other counties.

In other words, instead of using simple language explaining that a yes vote would lengthen the existing term limits from two to three terms (eight to 12 years), the politicians admit they sought out deceptive language that "worked" elsewhere.

Well, it did work. So far...

2010 ELECTIONS -- Citizens embrace term limits nationwide, Congressional pledgers win

2010-11-05T09:05:00.016-04:00

It was another banner election year for term limits.

Across the nation on Nov. 2, voters approved new term limits or defended or strengthened existing ones at the state and local level. Plus, about a dozen signers of the U.S. Term Limits Amendment Pledge won their Congressional races and will be pushing for term limits in the new Congress.

By signing the U.S. Term Limits Amendment Pledge, Congress members committed to "cosponsor and vote for" Congressional term limits along the lines of Sen. Jim DeMint's existing term limits amendment bill. DeMint's bill calls for limits of three terms (six years) for the House and two (12 years) for the Senate.

Signers who won include Dave Schweikert (AZ-5), David Rivera (FL-25), Michael Pompeo (KS-4), John Sullivan (OK-1), Frank Lucas (OK-3), Tom Coburn (OK-SEN), Tim Scott (SC-1), Jeff Duncan (SC-3), Mick Mulvaney (SC-5) and Ralph Hall (TX-4). Two races involving term limits pledgers have not been decided as of this writing, Joe Walsh (IL-8) and Rocky Raczkowski (MI-9).

Of all the 2010 term limits referenda I know about, term limits won 34 out of 35 jurisdictions. (If any referenda escaped my notice, please let me know.) Interestingly, this is a similar result as 2008, an election in which Democrats were ascendant.

2010 TERM LIMITS REFERENDA RESULTS

DOWNER'S GROVE, IL -- Referendum to limit mayor to two 4-year terms and commissioners to three (advisory only)
YES 84% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 16%

BOULDER CITY, NV -- Limits city council members to three terms in office
YES 71% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 29%

BOULDER CITY, NV -- Limits appointees of city committees to three terms
YES 60% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 40%

CAPE CANAVERAL, FL -- Limits terms of mayor and council members to two consecutive 4-year terms
YES 69.5% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 30.50%

CHAFFEE COUNTY, CO -- Would eliminate the term limit on the district attorney
YES 41%
NO 59% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

CLINTON COUNTY, VT -- Would abolish term limits for Clinton County legislators
YES 28.46%
NO 71.54% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX -- Increases waiting time from two to six years for politicians termed out of office to run again for the same seat
YES 63% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 37%

EAGLE COUNTY, CO -- Weakens term limits from two to three 4-year terms
YES 31%
NO 69% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

EL PASO COUNTY, CO -- Weakens term limits from two to three 4-year terms
YES 60%
NO 40% -- TERM LIMITS LOSE

FARRAGUT, TN -- Limits official to two terms in a single office, three in any office
YES 91.5% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 8.5%

FULLERTON, CA -- Limits council members to three 4-year terms
YES 79.8% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 20.2%

HEMET, CA -- No elected official can serve more than three 4-year terms in their life
YES 89% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 11%

INDIAN WELLS, CA -- Limits mayor and council to two consecutive 4-year terms
YES 79.25% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 20.75%

KIT CARSON COUNTY, CO -- Abolishes term limit on district attorney
YES 29%
NO 71% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

LAGUNA HILLS, CA -- Limits city council members to two 4-year terms
YES 74.4% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 25.6%

LOGAN COUNTY, CO -- Eliminates term limit on district attorney
YES 30%
NO 70% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

LOOMIS, CA -- Limits town council members to two consecutive 4-year terms
YES 55.4% -- TERM LIMITS WIN
NO 44.6%

MENIFEE, CA -- Limits council members to two consecutive 4-year terms
YES 81.7% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 18.3%

MORGAN COUNTY, CO -- Eliminates term limit on district attorney
YES 26%
NO 74% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OR -- Abolishes county term limit of two 4-year terms in any 12-year period
YES 49%
NO 51% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

MURIETTA, CA -- Limits council members to two consecutive 4-year terms
YES 67% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 33%

NAPERVILLE, IL -- Limits mayor and council members to three consecutive 4-year terms
YES 72% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 28%

NEW MEXICO (STATEWIDE)
Would permit county commissioners to serve three consecutive terms instead of two
YES 17.5%
NO 82.5% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

NEW YORK CITY, NY -- Reestablishes term limits on mayor and council members of two consecutive 4-year terms
YES 74% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 26%

OKLAHOMA (STATEWIDE) -- Sets lifetime term limit for governor and other statewide officials to two 4-year terms
YES 69.88% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 30.12%

PARK COUNTY, CO -- Would eliminate the term limit on the district attorney
YES 31%
NO 69% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

PHILLIPS COUNTY, CO -- Eliminates term limit on district attorney
YES 34%
NO 66% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

ROSEVILLE, CA -- Would weaken council term limits to three from two 4-year terms
YES 31%
NO 69% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

SAN DIEGO, CA -- Limits terms of county supervisors to two 4-year terms (on primary ballot June 2010)
YES 69% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 31%

SANTA CLARA, CA -- Limits water district members to three terms
YES 75.37% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 24.63%

SEDGWICK COUNTY, CO -- Eliminates term limit on district attorney
YES 39%
NO 61% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

STOW, OH -- Limits city council to two 4-year terms
YES 75% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 25%

STOW, OH -- Limits city finance director to two 4-year terms
YES 73% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO 27%

WASHINGTON COUNTY, CO -- Eliminates term limit on district attorney
YES 32%
NO 68% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

YUMA COUNTY, CO -- Abolishes existing term limit on district attorney
YES 35%
NO 65% -- TERM LIMITS WIN!

Crime does pay in El Paso County

2010-11-04T12:07:00.039-04:00

Are El Paso County voters the only voters in America who don’t support term limits?

It appears so. A review of term limits referenda around the country shows that term limits – either new term limits or reiterating or strengthening existing ones – passed everywhere they appeared on the ballot on Nov. 2 except in this Colorado county.

But looking closer, it turns out there is more to the story. It turns out that the ballot language was carefully written and promoted to confuse the voters into thinking that a vote for the anti-term limits referendum was a vote for term limits. In reality, the measure weakened the county commissioners’ term limit from two to three terms, giving them an extra four years in office at $87,300 per.

Hence, anti-term limits commissioners like Dennis Hisey and Sallie Clark, pictured, stand to pocket about $350,000 plus perks from their election day swindle.

The Colorado Springs Independent reports that county politicians “acknowledged they worded the measures strategically, asking whether officials should be limited to three terms. Unlike previous ballot measures, the questions didn't mention they're already limited to two terms."

State Sen. Ed Jones, a former El Paso county commissioner, said the measure was "disgusting" and "a slap in the face" of voters. City Councilman Darryl Glenn called it “misleading.” Former state representative Michael Merrifield told the Independent, "the way the question was posed made it sound like they were going to limit terms when in fact they are extending them."

No doubt. We’ve seen this trick before. In California in 2008, after losing twice at the ballot box already, an anti-term limits measure was crafted and marketed in a way suggesting that a yes vote would be a vote for term limits. In early polling, over 55% supported the measure. But in the course of the campaign the voters realized the trick, the polling flipped and Proposition 93 ended up losing by around 55%. In El Paso County, voters didn't get the message in time.

So, no, one can’t say El Paso is different because their voters oppose term limits. They are different because, in the year of the Tea Party, they are one county in America where the corrupt establishment Republicans won.

The U.S. Term Limits Amendment Pledge: An action plan for the 2010 election

2010-09-23T17:36:00.023-04:00

The primaries are over and now we're in the final stretch into the November election. All the momentum is riding with those calling for real change. But how can we make sure we are electing candidates who are serious about changing Washington and not just telling us what we want to hear? How can we hold them accountable once they win?

Here's how:

Today, U.S. Term Limits mailed out the last of 996 packages to every major party Congressional candidate in the country -- House and Senate, incumbent and challenger. In it is a letter from me and a pledge for the candidate to sign. The pledge commits the signer to cosponsor and vote for a constitutional amendment to limit Congressional terms to three in the House and two in the Senate.

Let's get as many candidates as possible to sign this pledge before election day! Then, U.S. Term Limits will follow up and make sure the signers who won live up to their word.

Think about the power of this simple project. After November, we can expect to have genuine term limits bills in both houses of Congress with a growing list of cosponsors. Then we can move on to the next step of the plan to get a vote on a real term limits amendment before 2012.

Please, right now, go to the new pledge website* and find out if your local Congressional candidates have signed the pledge. If not, call or email them and ask them to.

At every opportunity, particularly in public forums, ask your local Congressional candidates -- incumbents and challengers -- if they support term limits and, if they say yes, ask them if they have signed the U.S. Term Limits Pledge. History tells us if they won't sign, they don't really support term limits.

This is a big project that necessarily must be accomplished in a short period of time. We have big up-front costs of production, mailing and promotion. Please also go here and make a financial contribution to U.S. Term Limits to help pay for this important project.

Friends, this is it. With the skyrocketing polling on term limits, plummeting Congressional approval ratings and a real live term limits amendment bill in the Senate, never have the stars been so aligned to make this possible. We have the opportunity, let's take it.

*The website will be live the week of Sept. 26.

Term Limits and the 2010 U.S. Senate elections

2010-09-06T13:41:00.009-04:00

The issue of term limits is hot again, in a way we haven't seen in well over a decade. A poll released last week shows that 78 percent of Americans support term limits for the U.S. Congress, including large majorities for Democrats (74%), independents (74%) and Republicans (84%). Meanwhile, Congressional approval ratings are mining all-time lows.

Hence, now is the time to press for Congressional term limits. If not now, when?

We have a vehicle, the "Term Limits for All" amendment, with leadership from its author, Sen. Jim DeMint. What we need now is get more cosponsors and votes for the amendment. That means electing pro-term limits candidates. Just as importantly, it means getting these candidates to commit to co-sponsoring the DeMint amendment.

Why is this specific bill so important? Because supporting term limits in general but then opposing the specific proposal that is actually on the table is the oldest political trick in the book. We need to approach all Senate candidates with the follwing question, either in conversation, at public appearances, or by phone or email: "Will you become a co-sponsor of the DeMint amendment to limit Congressional terms?" Then we need to help them win.

ALASKA -- JOE MILLER

The Miller campaign informs us that he has spoken in support of term limits, but has not made the issue central to his campaign. They are looking at the DeMint amendment and will decide whether or not to come out in support.

CALIFORNIA -- CARLY FIORINA

Firoina made a big splash with her announcement to support term limits for the U.S. Congress. The problem is, the 12-year House limits she is calling for don't jibe with DeMint's amendment, which calls for six years for the House and 12 for the Senate. Thank her for her support of term limits, but will she sign on to the DeMint bill? Ask her!

COLORADO -- KEN BUCK

Buck is one of the eight Senate candidates being financially assisted by DeMint's Senate Conservatives Fund. One of the eight planks of the CSF is "Our country is being destroyed by career politicians. SCF candidates will support a constitutional amendment establishing congressional term limits. " That is a good sign and Buck has verbally supported term limits. But will he be a co-sponsor of the DeMint bill?

FLORIDA -- MARCO RUBIO

Another CSF recipient who has opined that the Republican Party should be the party of term limits. However, he has gone to great lengths to avoid committing to supporting Jim DeMint's bill in public. In fact, he has gone quiet on the issue since he successfully used his Tea Party stepladder to become the establishment favorite.

KENTUCKY -- RAND PAUL

Term limits is one of Rand Paul's top campaign issues and he has unambiguously come out in support of the DeMint bill. He has even pledged to work on trying to make term limits a presidential issue for 2012! Thanks, Rand.

OKLAHOMA -- TOM COBURN

Tom Coburn is a long-term term limits supporter and is already a co-sponsor of the DeMint bill. Thank you!

PENNSYLVANIA -- PAT TOOMEY

One can't doubt Toomey's term limit bona fides. Like Tom Coburn, Toomey left the House after fulfilling a self-imposed commitment to serve no more than eight years in the U.S. House. Today, he is supporting Congressional term limits. Will be be a co-sponsor of the DeMint bill? Ask him!

SOUTH CAROLINA -- JIM DEMINT

Jim DeMint is providing the national leadership needed on this issue. He is also spoken of as a presidential candidate for 2012 or beyond. If he runs, he'd be taking the term limits issue with him on the campaign trail.

Regarding Congressional term limits, some say, "It is a great idea, but it will never happen." Heck, I've said this before! But picture this: 1) 78% support from Americans of all parties, 2) Congressional approval ratings at all-time lows, 3) an amendment bill in the U.S. Senate with a growing list of cosponsors, 4) a companion bill submitted in the House, 5) term limits become important campaign issue across the country, and then, 5) presidential sponsorship.

All of a sudden, it seems like it can happen, doesn't it? Let's make it so!

(By the way, if you have info about these or other Senate races in regards to term limits, please share. You can email me here.)

West Palm Beach case instructive for local term limits defenders everywhere

2010-08-05T11:35:00.006-04:00

The continuing saga in West Palm Beach, Fla., where a two-term incumbent mayor is trying to weaken the existing voter-approved term limit so she can run again, is one that is again playing out in cities and even state legislatures across the country. And the result is nearly always the same: the people win.

But it does require some resistance. It may be instructive to look at how citizens in this South Florida city are defending their popular term limit against the political ambitions of their mayor and certain city commissioners. Their blog, updated daily, tells the story.

The end result is a near foregone conclusion -- 2009 polling shows some 76% of Floridians in the Southeast region of the state oppose replacing a 8-year term limit with a 12-year one -- as long as a few people, like West Palm Beach businessman Rick Shepherd shown here, stand up and rally their neighbors to act.

West Palm Beach Mayor Lois Frankel clinging to power in spite of term limit

2010-07-23T10:18:00.020-04:00

It’s an old, old story now playing in re-runs in West Palm Beach, Fla. An arrogant politician feels entitled to his or her position and schemes to overturn popular term limits to keep it.

In this case, Mayor Lois Frankel has launched a petition drive to weaken West Palm Beach’s 8-year mayoral term limit. Although her earlier trial balloons were shot down, she is attempting a desperate end run around rank-and-file West Palm Beach citizens who embrace the 8-year limits.

There is little doubt that voters love term limits. This is true nationally – a 2008 poll shows 83 percent generic support for the idea – but also in Florida where an April 2009 statewide poll showed 79 percent specifically favoring Florida’s 8-year limit on the state legislature. Here in Palm Beach County, 8-year term limits for the county commission won in 2002 with 70 percent of the vote. In fact, right now there is a citizen referendum campaign under way to enact term limits in Palm Beach Gardens!

I am tempted to quote Frankel regarding a downtown development she was pushing, "Why bother with a referendum when it’s widely accepted?"

There is only one reason, of course. Lois Frankel does not want to let go to the reins of power. Yes, she could run again for mayor later under West Palm Beach law. But she couldn’t do so now with all the exceptional powers of an incumbent in a strong mayor system.

That’s right, Mayor Frankel. And that is reason number one why we have 8-year term limits in this city!

Let’s review some of the reasons that West Palm Beach has 8-year term limits and why we should keep them:

In 1991, West Palm Beach followed other large and growing cities in adopting a strong-mayor system of government with term limits via voter referendum. This is a system where the elected mayor is given almost total administrative authority and a clear, wide range of political independence. As turnout is very small in local elections and the mayor has massive favors to grant to local interests, a strong mayor has enormous electoral advantage that largely detaches him or her from the will of the people. Hence term limits were included as a necessary limit of strong mayor power by ensuring regular, competitive elections.

Under any municipal system – but particularly under a strong mayor system -- term limits topple the local fiefdoms that develop through the natural merging of interests between incumbents and special interests.

As cities grow and the leadership positions become more powerful, term limits are more important than ever. That is why 9 of the 10 largest cities in America have term limits.

Eight years is the traditional, time-tested American term limit for a good reason: A eight-year term balances the benefits of both experience and of rotation in office. Eight-year term limits are imposed on the President of the United States, Florida’s governor, the Florida legislature and the Palm Beach County Commission. What is the argument for exalting the mayor of West Palm Beach above all other politicians?

The strong mayor position in particular attracts careerists. It is, after all, a comfortable job, not just an opportunity for public service. For instance, in 2004, Mayor Frankel was awarded a 40% raise to today’s salary of $125,000. The paychecks come with some other considerable perks including: free health and dental care with no deductible, no premiums, no co-pays, no prescription drug costs and the ability to see any doctor with out additional cost; $400 per month car allowance; $420 per month ‘management incentive; life insurance and long-term care insurance; and a retirement plan.

Term limits are democratic. The strong mayor system was chosen to centralize power in order to move city projects forward, not to create a monarchy. Term limits ensure rotation in office, which necessarily introduces a broader range of experience and perspectives, permits greater citizen participation and broadens the circle of those with intimate knowledge of local government. It helps create a more engaged and informed local electorate.

Term limits discourage corruption. Corruption is highly correlated to tenure because secure tenure breeds the hubris and opportunity necessary for corruption to blossom. Not only that, but the closed, tight circle of a government without regular rotation is far less transparent – and hence less accountable – than a more open, term-limited one. This was a key reason why term limits for the Palm Beach County Commission was so important. Please note that the two most outspoken opponents of the 2002 campaign for county commission term limits – Mary McCarty and Warren Newell – are now in prison for corruption.

The bottom line is that at a time when the unemployment rate in Florida is more than 10 percent, it is shameful that Mayor Frankel's top priority is to save her own job. Let’s keep our 8-year term limits!

Does your Congressional candidate support the term limits bill? ASK!

2010-03-09T08:50:00.006-05:00

With Congressional approval ratings at historic lows, support for term limits at all-time highs and tea partiers in the streets holding term limits signs, it seems like there is no better time to press for Congressional term limits.

What is missing so far is political leadership. But that might be changing.

For the first time since the Contract with America era we have a popular U.S. Senator, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, sponsoring a term limit amendment. He’s attracted only three senate cosponsors so far and two of those are leaving the Senate, but several potential new ones are currently campaigning for a Senate seat using term limits as a leading campaign theme.

Start with Kentucky. There, Senate candidate Rand Paul – leading in the polls both against his Republican primary opponent and likely Democratic challengers – has pledged to make term limits his number one issue if elected.

"Term limits is the preeminent issue of our campaign," he said. "I will travel to Frankfort and other legislatures to try to get them to act on this issue so we have both Congress and the state legislatures working on it."

But he won’t stop there.

"I will do my best to convince our presidential candidate on the GOP side to adopt the issue as well," Paul said. "I think this is vital in pushing this issue forward."

Another Senate hopeful – also leading in a Republican primary – is Florida’s Marco Rubio. Rubio says he’s seen term limits work when he was Speaker of the House in Florida’s legislature. In fact, he was term-limited out of office. His first-hand experience has led him to believe the U.S. Congress should be term limited too.

"We should be the party of term limits," Rubio told National Review. "We should be the party that says it’s not natural for any human being to serve more than half his adult life in the U.S. Congress."

Rubio, however, is so far ducking the question of whether he will actually cosponsor the DeMint bill, or just likes talking about it.

In Illinois, state senator and former Illinois GOP Chair Gilbert Baker is in a tough primary fight. He’s hoping term limits put him over the top.

"We have got to return to the spirit of a citizen legislature," Baker said. "One way to get back to that, I am going to push for a two term limit in the United States Senate." To emphasize the point, Baker promised that whether he is successful or not, he personally would leave after his two terms. "Twelve years is long enough."

Other term-limits advocates include Republican Stephen Fincher, a leading candidate to succeed retiring Rep. John Tanner (D-TN) and Democrat Iraq War veteran Tommy Sowers, a long-shot candidate against Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO).

U.S. Term Limits urges all voters to ask their Congressional candidates where they stand on Sen. Jim DeMint’s amendment to limit senators to two terms and representatives to three terms in office. We have to nail them down on this before the election.

Ask them and let us know. We’ll make sure term limits supporters in their states know their answer.

West Palm Beach: The city's not about one person

2010-02-27T17:57:00.021-05:00

When former West Palm Beach mayor Nancy Graham reached the end of her second term, she she initially ran to the courts to circumvent the 8-year term limit. The she thought better of it: "The city's not about one person," she said.

Fast forward to 2010. Another big ideas (and big budgets!) mayor, Lois Frankel, is coming to the end of her second term and seeking a way to keep her job. Her chosen vehicle is the city's charter review commission, which is a 5-member board created to review and suggest changes to the city's system of government. In January she stacked the commission with four of her devotees who are said to be impartially weighing the benefits of a Frankel third term.

"I have no ulterior motive," Frankel told the Palm Beach Post. "The committee was not put together to look at (term limits)."

Yeah, right.

She didn't fool the Post, nor anyone else. As the Post points out in an excellent editorial on the subject, "If her push to end term limits proves to be unpopular, the mayor has a backup plan that would give her an additional 20 months in office. That plan calls for timing mayoral elections with presidential elections. Instead of leaving office in March 2011, Mayor Frankel would stay until November 2012."

The idea of a charter review commission is a legitimate one, and indeed it behooves the city to review its new (well, since 1991) strong mayor system. Term limits, among their other benefits, help limit the power of the strong executive, by ensuring that the significant power of this position cannot be used to secure a job for life. The strong mayor system was intended to centralize authority in order to move city projects forward, not to create a monarchy.

Frankel is out of touch enough to be shocked at the pushback she is getting. The press, fellow city commissioners (including, of course, potential mayoral candidates) and citizen activists lept into action as soon as the first charter review commission meeting was announced. As a result, the first meeting was cancelled about an hour before it was scheduled to start.

It is not late for Mayor Frankel to tuck the burst trial balloon in her pocket and, with dignity, serve out her last year as mayor. She can always run again in the future after sitting out a term if she wishes, albeit without the powers of incumbency that make a low-turnout reelection a formality.

Nonetheless, West Palm Beach citizens are laying defensive groundwork just in case their popular term limits law is assaulted.

Only 8% of Americans want Congress reelected

2010-02-15T16:27:00.012-05:00

According to a new poll by CBS News and the New York Times:

8 percent of Americans want the members of Congress reelected.
80 percent of Americans said members of Congress are more interested in serving special interests than the people they represent.
75 percent disapprove of the job Congress is doing.

These numbers complement perfectly the latest (October 2008) national polling that shows that 83 percent of Americans support term limits on their elected officials. All show a bi-, tri- and non-partisan yearning of the American people for the lost tradition of rotation in office that our Founders intended.

So this means that incumbents will get clobbered in the 2010 elections? Well, maybe, but history shows that nearly all the change will occur in competitive open seat elections. Even in the dramatic years of change, such as 1992-94 and 1996-98 (see chart above), Congressional incumbents won overwhelmingly in spite of the mood of the country that showed up clearly in competitive races.

Please note the Massachusetts message was only made possible by the opening up of Sen. Ted Kennedy's seat. In other anticipated upsets -- Rand Paul in Kentucky and Marco Rubio in Florida, for example -- it is the open seats that are giving voters their voice.

Only an institutional reform like term limits can fix the institutional problem of entrenched incumbency. In the meantime, voters can take advantage of open seats as they occur to meaningfully express their will. But with term limits, it will not require crisis, retirements and luck to effectuate change. Instead, there will be rolling open seats in every district in the nation, drastically improving the people's representation on a regular basis.

(Thanks to the Center for Responsive Politics for the image above.)

Ed Roski Jr.: A California case study in soft corruption

2010-02-15T15:57:00.008-05:00

According to the Los Angeles Times on Jan. 30, “Ed Roski Jr., the L.A. County billionaire who got state legislators to exempt his proposed NFL stadium from environmental laws, has showered the lawmakers with tens of thousands of dollars in campaign cash… The money is part of $505,000 that Roski put into California political campaigns during the second half of 2009, including $300,000 toward a proposed ballot measure that would change term limits.”

That's called payback.

This legal bribe is being offered as California politicians are once again raising cash for a referendum effort to overturn or weaken term limits in California. In their last financial disclosure report, the petition effort reports raising about $485,000, a full $300,000 of it from Roski. The rest is from other special interests with pending business before the legislature including the LA County Federation of Labor, LA Jobs PAC, O'Melveny & Myers trial lawyers PAC, a police union and the BNSF Railway Co.

This will be the third time Californians will be asked to vote on term limits since the voters originally passed them back in 1990. In both 2002 and 2008, the voters rebuffed the politicians.

Money isn't enough by itself. In both of those previous efforts, the anti-term limits forces raised and spend some 10 times as much much as the term limits supporters.

So, they've dusted off and tweaked a gimmick in order to trick the people into voting for it. In California, the lower house is limited to six years and the upper house, eight. That is, you could serve in one and then the other for a total of 14 years total. The new proposal to weaken term limits will increase the number of years to 12 in each house, but limit politicians to a total of 12 overall. They are going to claim that their proposal actually strengthens the term limits law, as it reduces total service to 12 years from 14. You have to admit: it may be arrogant and deceptive, but it is clever.

Greased with enough cash and enough obfuscation, the politicians and lobbies think the third time might be the charm. They've already squandered tens of millions of dollars in their quest to retain power but their purse keeps growing because they have the favors to grant. In a state with a 12%-plus unemployment rate, the jobs they're fighting the hardest to keep are their own.

Arizona politicians focus on jobs -- their own!

2010-01-28T14:42:00.012-05:00

With the country in recession, our politicians' chief challenge is how to preserve jobs -- starting with their own. As incumbent reelection rates typically exceed 90%, the second worst thing that can happen to a politician is to have to leave their seat and face an open, competitive election for a new one. (The first worst thing, of course, would be to get a private sector job!)

And so, across the land, there is a wave of politicians seeking to overturn term limits. In Arizona, Missouri, California, Michigan, South Dakota and Florida, anti-term limits bills are pending. Most are simply trial balloons that will be shot down as soon as citizens are alerted to them. Politicians who do some polling or review recent ballot results will find out quickly that citizens desire term limits now more than ever.

Nonetheless, in Arizona one such bill to repeal term limits, sponsored by Carolyn Allen (R-Scottsdale), has just emerged from the Judiciary Committee on Jan. 19.

What are they thinking? Not about their constituents, you can be sure. Eight-year legislative term limits were originally enacted in 1992 when Arizonans voted with 74 percent of the vote to add them to the state’s constitution.

In response, U.S. Term Limits is running this 30-second television commercial on Arizona TV to let the people know what's going on. Stay tuned.

Would term limits improve Fed independence?

2010-01-27T15:35:00.007-05:00

It is widely remarked that while there are numerous contributors to the current credit crisis, the primary cause -- without which the others would not have led to calamity or even occurred at all -- is the easy money policy of the Fed through much of the '00s.

Of course, Wall Street, the banking industry and politicians in both the White House and the Congress have historically pressured the Fed to keep the printing presses running. Easy money generally means low interest rates and expansion of the economy even if the actual savings patterns of Americans don't warrant it. Although bubbles and/or price inflation are the eventual result of such policies, historically the Fed has buckled to this political pressure. It continues to do so right now.

So how do we insulate the Fed chief from these powerful special interests? One Wall Street Journal blogger suggests term limits.

In his Jan. 26 post, Jon Hilsenrath points out that the chief of the European Central Bank has an eight-year limit and maybe Fed chairmen should too. After all, term limits "would insulate the Fed from political meddling because a chairman would know that there would be no point to pleasing political masters because the job runs out after eight years."

He suggests the Fed "became complacent during the latter years of [Alan Greenspan's 19-year] reign, keeping interest rates too low for too long ... and underestimating building risks in the financial system. Because the economy seemed to do so well for so long, it became harder over time to second-guess the approach championed by Mr. Greenspan."

Simon Gilchrist, a Boston University economist, agrees. “It would accomplish the goal of giving the public a greater sense of oversight without creating undue political influence ... It would also have the benefit of forcing the Fed to be more articulate about its specific goals and policies,” he said, because it would de-emphasize the power of single chairman.

Interesting. I confess I had never considered it, but I think he's right. Naturally, a central banking system in which interest rates and money supply are manipulated by political appointees can never be independent of politics. But term limits may reduce the special interest pressure.

Another point that Hilsenrath doesn't mention: Because of his failures Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke currently suffers from CYA Syndrome and presides over a highly secretive organization that aggravates this common political illness. New leadership would feel freer to 'fess up and share information, improving the transparency of the body as well.

Independence? Transparency? Bernanke promised both when he took the reins at the Fed. We didn't get them. Term limits may help.

Freudenthal: The Wyoming Caudillo?

2010-01-18T09:42:00.026-05:00

According to the Associated Press, Gov. Dave Freudenthal of Wyoming is "still undecided whether he'll seek a third term next year." The problem is, like 35 other states, Wyoming has gubernatorial term limits. He is legally barred from running!

If he jumps in the race, he'll join a growing list of Third World chief executives who are defying their constitutions, not to mention their people, to retain power after their term limit expires. Over the last few years, Hugo Chavez in Venzuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua and Manuel Zelaya in the Honduras have cast off -- or tried to -- the shackles of term limits intended to guarantee rotation in office.

In the case of President Zelaya, his extra-legal ambitions actually led to a military coup and constitutional crisis last year. So you need to be careful how you do such things. "You need to have thought about kind of how you're going to structure it," the governor told the AP about his potential campaign.

Well, let's see. The governor can appeal to the people, as Wyoming does have a citizen initiative process. But there is not enough time. Plus, there's the pesky fact that approval of term limits in polls have hit all-time highs. No, that's right out.

The governor could go to the legislature and have them change Wyoming State Statute Title 22, Chapter 5, which limits him to serving only eight out of any 16 years. But the Republican legislature is unlikely to ditch a popular law to further the personal ambitions of a Democratic governor. No can do.

Well, there's always the courts. It didn't work for President Zelaya, whose final straw was his standoff with the Honduran Supreme Court. But with the right legal team, a friendly judge and a little flexing of his gubernatorial muscles, maybe he could get the law shot down on technicalities. After all, the legislature pulled off this trick back in 2004, nixing a citizen referendum on term limits that had passed with 77 percent of the vote.

Yes, maybe he could get away with it. But he shouldn't try. In the United States, we take for granted equality under the law and the peaceful and legal transfer of power election after election. In respect for these traditions, Gov. Freudenthal should stand down, thank Wyoming citizens for his opportunity to serve them ... and move on.

TERM LIMITS FOR ALL amendment introduced!

2009-11-10T15:22:00.007-05:00

It's official. Sen. Jim DeMint has introduced a bill to amend the U.S. Constitution to limit the terms of the U.S. Congress.

If the proposal becomes law, Senators will be limited to two terms (12 years) and Representatives will be limited to three (six years). The text of the bill and amendment can be found here.

The amendment is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), and Sam Brownback (R-Kansas). As an amendment to the Constitution, it would require a two-thirds majority vote approval in the House and Senate and must be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

"Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians," said Senator DeMint. "As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward spending taxpayer dollars to buyoff special interests, covering over corruption in the bureaucracy, fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork – in short, amassing their own power. I have come to realize that if we want to change the policies coming out of Congress, we must change the process itself. Over the last 20 years, Washington politicians have been reelected about 90% of the time because the system is heavily tilted in favor of incumbents. If we really want to put an end to business as usual, we’ve got to have new leaders coming to Washington instead of rearranging the deck chairs as the ship goes down.”

He's right. And now we have some work to do.

First, please call your Senator and ask him or her to become a cosponsor of this amendment. Second, please sign our on-line petition to show your support for Sen. DeMint's amendment. Third, send around the petition link to your friends and family and urge them to sign the petition. Fourth, write a letter to the editor announcing the bill and your support of it. Be sure to include how your Senators stand on the issue.

Our most recent polling shows 83% of Americans support term limits. Hence, this should be a done deal. But our system is broken. This amendment is a big step toward fixing it.

BREAKING NEWS: Sen. DeMint to drop term limits bill!

2009-11-08T14:00:00.000-05:00

Great news: Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) will soon be launching a Constitutional amendment bill to limit terms of the U.S. Congress!

I am often asked by reporters and talk radio hosts what it would take to achieve Congressional term limits. It is a big project and will take the right conditions to get the job done.

First, I say, we need the people on our side. Check.

Second, we need historically low approval ratings on Congress. Check.

Third, we need political leadership. Check?

Yes, it looks we finally have that too. The remarks below are excerpted from U.S. Senator Jim DeMint’s podcast of October 22, 2009. Senator DeMint, who voluntarily limited his tenure in the House of Representatives to three terms, is announcing the imminent launch of a bill to Constitutionally limit terms.

Take it away, Sen. DeMint:

"The longer I stay in Washington, the more I have come to realize that the problem in the federal government isn't just the people...it’s the process.

"The system itself is so much more powerful than either party or interest group, let alone one president or congressional leader. In Washington, the rules of the game are rigged—in favor of bigger government, higher taxes, more debt, and the time-honored system of political back-scratching of 'go along to get along.

"The fact is, party doesn’t matter when it comes to reform. If you want to change the policies, you have to change the process. That’s why in the next few weeks I will introduce a new constitutional amendment to limit members of the House of Representatives to three terms (which is six years), and members of the Senate to two terms (which is twelve years).

"As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork—in short, amassing their own power. Since all that power is going to disappear in a few years anyway, term-limited legislators will be far less likely to make compromises with the system.

"Opponents of term limits say that the nation needs wise and seasoned leaders to lead the nation through crises and find consensus on difficult issues. Well, that’s exactly what we’ve got now.... How do you think it’s working out for us? It wasn’t the People who gave us a 12-trillion dollar debt, trillion-dollar deficits, 100-trillion-dollar long term shortfall in Social Security and Medicare, the Wall Street and auto bailouts, and the health care takeover. It was those wise and seasoned leaders, who enjoy lives of privilege almost wholly immune from the consequences of their policy failures.

"Term limits are not enough, of course. I hope my amendment will eventually be ratified, and then followed by other structural reforms to make our public institutions more transparent and accountable. But term limits are a good start. Because if we really want reform, we all know it’s not enough just to change the congressmen—we have to change Congress itself."

The fourth thing we need to win is for grass roots activists to raise such a clamor that this bill cannot be ignored and Congress members are afraid to vote against it.

So please, right now, go to the U.S. Terms Limits website and sign the on-line petition reiterating Sen. DeMint's call for term limits. And send around the link to all your friends and associates of all political persuasions.

If not now, when?

After vet fiasco, Florida pol returns with new anti-term limit gimmick

2009-11-08T13:49:00.009-05:00

Oh no, not again. Florida State Sen. Mike Bennett (R-Bradenton) is back pitching a Constitutional amendment to weaken Florida’s popular and successful 8-year term limits law.

Bennett is not so deaf to the will of voters that he doesn’t recognize the popularity of the law he is attacking. It’s just that he doesn’t care. He knows he has to come up with some way to get around voter sentiment, so he has once again been rummaging around the bottom of the careerist politician garbage pail for ideas.

Last session, he tacked an anti-term limits amendment to a bill that would extend a popular property tax discount to a broader group of disabled veterans. He got jeers and laughs, but not the votes.

This session he is hawking a new gimmick to fire up support for incumbent entrenchment. His new offer you can’t refuse -- according to the Tampa Tribune’s Catherine Dolinski – is to extend 12-year term limits to city and county offices as well. Get it? That way, he can claim a vote for this bill is a vote for term limits!

Of course, citizens in all the counties and cities that worked so hard to collect the signatures for, not to mention all the voters that approved, all the existing local 8-year term limits referenda may object. But they weren’t going to support Bennett’s bill anyway. With this clever stroke, he aims to clinch the support of local term-limited incumbents throughout the state and many term limits supporters who may not be paying close enough attention.

Will it be enough? I doubt it. Such a proposal would have to go to the voters first, and the threshold for Constitutional amendments is 60%. We must be vigilant always, of course, but right now the only attention his new idea demands is a rolling of the eyes.

Schwarzenegger and those 'crazy' term limits

2009-11-08T12:01:00.002-05:00

Term limits activism is empowering and often thrilling, but there are some repetitive aspects of it that just get downright tedious. Number one on the list is the phenomenon of the politician who runs for office calling for term limits, becomes part of the power structure, and then turns his or her back on term limits and the voters who love them.

Take California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Referring to former state Sen. Jack Scott, the governor recently opined that he “was termed out because we have these crazy term limits here in California and people that are that experienced like him then have to leave and move on.”

No. What’s crazy is thinking that out of 36.7 million people, only the elite political class of individuals are “experienced” enough to hold public office.

In 2003, as a candidate, Arnold Schwarzenegger said: “My campaign for governor is based on the concept that California's state government belongs to the people, not the career politicians. As we are now seeing with the state's budget crisis and anti-business policies, it is too easy for the politicians to become disconnected from the people they are supposed to represent. That is why I believe in citizen legislators and yes, even citizen governors. It is also why I am such a strong believer in term limits.”

Funny what a few years in public office does to a politician. In 2008, Schwarzenegger turned against term limits and sided with the political establishment when he endorsed Proposition 93, a ballot measure that, had it not been defeated, would have weakened term limits.

What logic is there in rewarding the very legislators that are leading the state to the brink by extending their terms to allow them to 'serve' more?

In fact, logic requires that we move the opposite direction. California has the highest paid legislators in the country and they work all year 'round. The careerist impulse may have been tempered in California by term limits, but it is not enough. The perks of power are just too sweet for California pols who will clearly do anything to keep their cozy jobs.

Instead, we get claims that are truly crazy: thinking that the political establishment just needs more time to fix the very problems for which its own antics are so glaringly responsible.

Schwarzenegger knew better in 2003. The people of California know better in 2009. And they assuredly will defeat SCA 24—yet another proposed constitutional amendment to weaken term limits—in 2010.

(See my op-ed on this subject in the Oct. 31 edition of the L.A. Times.)

Colombia's Uribe to skirt term limit -- again

2009-09-02T09:13:00.014-04:00

Here we go again: Latin American leader loves power, won’t respect Constitutional term limit. The latest in this growing queue of dishonor is Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. Of course, he's been on this ride before.

Uribe goaded the lower House yesterday into approving a referendum to relax the country’s constitutional term limit and continue to hold office for a third term. The vote was 85-5 with 76 abstentions. The bill has already passed the Colombian Senate. Keep in mind this is the second time the term limit – originally one four-year term – has been relaxed for Uribe. The first time was in 2005.

Uribe's 2005 victory over term limits emboldened Hugo Chavez of Venezuela who famously announced, bluntly and accurately, that “Chavez is not leaving, Chavez stays…” It took Chavez two referenda to get the job done. In the first in 2007 he had not used sufficient bribery or intimidation to get it through, but by the second in early 2009 he had got the recipe right. Ecuador's Rafael Correa and Bolivia's Evo Morales changed their constitutions -- and term limits -- shortly thereafter.

President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras was less fortunate. It turns out Honduras is not constitutionally permitted to have a referendum to relax term limits. His illegal insistence on doing so got him kicked out of his country in a bloodless coup.

Clearly, there is a good reason for this extra constitutional precaution in Honduras. Latin America has a history of caudillos who will not relinquish power, ever. As a result, Constitutional reforms were made across the region to protect nations from presidents consolidating sufficient power to organize mass constituencies, bribe legislators and steal elections, establishing permanent Castro-like (or U.S. Congressman-like!) incumbency.

In the United States, we view term limits as a good government reform that empowers citizens relative to public officials. To view term limits so casually is a luxury of our stable democracy. In Latin America and many other parts of the world, term limits are one of the last safeguards against tyranny.

Next in line: Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, who is currently promoting a referendum for a new constitution that ditches term limits.

In light of this this continent-wide attack on democracy and rotation in office, one has to respect Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva who has announced numerous times that he would respect his nation’s constitution and will not seek a third term. “I think that the transfer of power is essential for democracy,” he said.

Lula’s right. And it takes a term limit with teeth to ensure a transfer of power.

Rand Paul: Like Father, Like Son

2009-08-26T17:23:00.019-04:00

Following the announcement earlier this month that incumbent and fellow Republican Jim Bunning is not going to seek reelection, Rand Paul officially declared his candidacy for the U.S. Senate representing Kentucky.

Paul, a 40-something opthalmologist from Bowling Green, has never held political office but he has gained quite a bit of campaign experience from helping his father, Texas Congressman Ron Paul, and name recognition through his leadership of the Kentucky Taxpayers United, an activist organization affiliated with the National Taxpayers Union. He said he would go to Washington as a true citizen legislator.

Like his father, Rand is a supporter of Congressional term limits. In a recent interview with the Liberty Maven blog, he was asked if he supported term limits and whether he was willing to term limit himself. Paul was clear: "I support both a Constitutional amendment and/or legislation if it could be done Constitutionally. Voluntary term limits have not worked because the good Congressmen kept the pledge and went home and the creeps broke their pledges and stayed. Also, only a very small percentage, maybe ten to fifteen, ever were elected with a voluntary pledge." Fair enough.

He is currently leading with this popular message in his stump speeches. Early polling show Paul to be a contender and his fundraising has been phenomenal so far, bringing in over $740,000 in just a few months, including a Kentucky record of $430,000 in one day.

Last year another committed term limits supporter -- Florida's Rep. Tom Rooney -- snuck into Congress. Maybe we'll see another, perhaps many others, in 2010. After all, polls show popular support for term limits at an all-time high and incumbents at a low.

Let's pop this question to all Congressional candidates during the next election cycle: Do you support Congressional term limits?

Luther Martin, term limits prophet

2009-07-09T08:11:00.012-04:00

I am reading an informative and humorous little book called Forgotten Founder, Drunken Prophet: The Life of Luther Martin by Bill Kauffman. Martin was a representative of Maryland at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 and an example -- exasperating to many -- of the so-called anti-federalists who feared the new Constitution would centralize new and nearly unlimited national powers. To protect Americans' liberties, the antis clamored for, among other things, a Bill of Rights and term limits. They got the former but not the latter.

In the debates over term limits, Virginian George Mason -- often called the father of the Bill of Rights -- pointed out that "nothing is so essential to the preservation of a republican government as a periodical rotation."

Martin argued vociferously, as apparently it was the only way he knew how, that the entrenched politician "will take his family to the place where the government shall be fixed; that will become his home, and there is every reason to expect, that his future views and prospects will centre in the favors and emoluments of the general government." It is in lines like these that Luther earned the title 'prophet' in the book's title.

But not only the anti-federalists feared an entrenched incumbency. Federalist G. Livingston of New York imagined the elite life of political lifers thusly:

In this Eden they will reside with their families, distant from the observation of the people. In such a situation, men are apt to forget their dependence, lose their sympathy and contract selfish habits ... The senators will associate only with men of their own class, and thus become strangers to the condition of the common people. They should not only return, and be obliged to live with the people, but return to their former rank of citizenship, both to revive their sense of dependence and to gain a knowledge of the country.

The anti-federalists are labeled by history as the losers in the Constitutional battle, but their many contributions to the Constitution -- tributes to their obstinancy and adherence to principle -- greatly improved that document and helped it preserve rather than threaten liberty.

Time has proven the antis correct on term limits. However, to be fair, it took quite a while for their dark predictions to materialize, as rotation in office was so much part of the revolutionary (small-R) republican creed that it wasn't until the turn of the 20th century that the professional politician became the norm in the Congress and legislatures across the country.

Many of the delegates who supported rotation in office but felt that term limits were unnecessary never dreamed of Congress members holding their seats for decades. The antis did, and slept fitfully upon leaving Philadelphia.

Tea partiers: Term limits now!

2009-07-07T10:57:00.016-04:00

The "tea party" movement is no longer a one-time phenomenon in response to corporate bailouts, stimulus spending, money supply inflation and ballooning government debt. On July 4, over 1,300 more tea party demonstrations were scheduled across the country and -- once again -- calls for term limits were ubiquitous at these events.

It is no wonder. Unemployment is approaching double digits and companies and banks are closing their doors every week. The stock and real estate markets are in the tank. But while people are suffering from the bust, the federal government is enjoying a boom. It is playing the profitable game of Reverse Robin Hood: using the crisis as cover for taking money from the public to bail out and/or pay off specific corporations, banks, unions and other important political constituents.

If citizens believe they are not being represented, they are correct. Incumbent Congress members retake their seats about 95% of the time with minimum of effort, as they either run unchallenged or face vastly underfunded challengers, often gadflies. They hold these seats for decades and then run the Congress by right of seniority. As demonstrated by the Cato Institute, tenure in office is highly correlated to increased spending patterns. Hence, the unbeatable who spend the most run the show.

This is true under Obama and Pelosi as it was under Bush and DeLay. Clearly, last November's election didn't provide the change it promised. Real change will require severing the comfortable relationships between entrenched incumbents and special interests. It will require citizen access to reins of government via rotation in office.

Heed the voters in the streets: it will require term limits.

Honduran military steps in to enforce presidential term limit

2009-06-30T06:18:00.012-04:00

Like his mentor Hugo Chavez, (former?) Honduran President Manuel Zelaya needed to get around his country's constitutional term limit to hold on and extend his power over this Latin American country.

While the president has no power under Honduran law to hold a referendum to make consitutional changes, the president announced he would do so anyway. When the nation's army chief Gen. Romeo Vasquez refused to distribute the ballots for the illegal election, he was fired. When the Honduran Supreme Court mandated the reinstatement of Vazquez, Zelaya refused.

The army put down Zelaya's attempted coup with a coup of its own.

"Zelaya has provoked this institutional crisis," said Michael Shifter, a Latin American analyst at Washington's Inter-American Dialogue. "He seems to have a very strong appetite for power. He's trying to be the victim, but he won't get a lot of sympathy by defying the country's institutions."

In the United States, we view term limits as a good government reform that empowers citizens relative to public officials. To view term limits so casually is a luxury of our stable democracy.
In many other parts of the world, term limits are one of the last safeguards against tyranny.

If the action by the military is in good faith, it will soon step aside and permit the elected rotation in office that the Honduran constitution requires and the people deserve. The interim leader, Roberto Micheletti, says that presidential elections will be held as scheduled and that he will step down in January when Zelaya's term would normally expire. We'll see. One of the temptations of power that make term limits so crucial is that politicians always believe that they are indispensible. This hubris comes with the job.

In Colombia, president Alvaro Uribe is next in line to try to overturn his presidential term limits, although like American politicians he is relying solely on legal machinations to hold on to his power. Stay tuned, as the Latin American term limits saga continues.

Entrenched incumbency a result of 'stupidity?'

2009-05-18T11:34:00.005-04:00

The Wall Street Journal today published a letter I wrote in response to an anti-term limits letter. Here it is:

Editor,

In his May 11 letter ("Haven't You Noticed Term Limits Are in the Constitution"), Thomas J. Miranda claims that "the Constitution already provides for term limits," but that people "are too stupid" to do their constitutional duty and vote their representatives out of office.

He is right that over 90% of U.S. House incumbents are routinely re-elected to their seats, but "stupidity" is not the explanation. In 2008, 55 incumbent seats went unchallenged. In many more seats, the incumbent was challenged by a drastically underfunded candidate who didn't receive meaningful support from their own party. And many of these were simply gadflies.

This situation did not occur because people are stupid, but for the very rational reason that against such odds it does not pay for successful, goal-oriented people to run for office against incumbents. It is rational for parties to avoid using limited resources on unwinnable seats. Meanwhile, special interests quite rationally fill the coffers of and maintain their relationships with entrenched incumbents.

For these reasons among others, voters get lousy choices and incumbents are practically unbeatable. Term limits would change this dynamic by providing open, competitive races at regular intervals in every congressional seat. It's a smart idea.

Philip Blumel
Atlantis, Fla.

Term limits a hit at Tax Day tea parties

2009-04-30T08:45:00.016-04:00

Since Rick Santelli made his call for a new Boston Tea Party on CNBC in February, activists have been throwing tea party demonstrations across the nation protesting corporate bailouts and economic 'stimulus.' Then on April 15, citizens across America participated in over 800 tea parties on a single day. Spontaneously, the call for term limits was heard at many or most of these rallies.

I saw term limits signs at the tea parties I attended in West Palm Beach and Tallahassee, Florida, and on the rally coverage they showed on CNBC. Everyone I talked to saw term limits signs at their rallies too, and a Google and YouTube search shows that term limits signs were ubiquitous. No organization was promoting this; it was a spontaneous display of citizen conviction.

It is quite natural when you think about it. The frustration that led to the rallies is the recognition that the Congress (with the Treasury and The Fed) are doling out trillions to special interests even as the people suffering from a deep recession. Clearly, these citizens feel that the U.S. Congress is not representing them, but instead AIG, Bank of America, Freddie and Fannie, General Motors, the United Auto Workers, etc. This helpless feeling in the face of special interest influence is the same that pulls citizens into the term limits movement.

Citizens are correct they are not being represented. Incumbent Congress members retake their seats about 95% of the time with minimum of effort, as they either run unchallenged or face vastly underfunded challengers, often gadflies. They hold these seats for decades and then run the Congress by right of seniority. As demonstrated by the Cato Institute, tenure in office is highly correlated to increased spending patterns. Hence, the unbeatable who spend the most run the show.

The only solution is the lost American tradition of rotation in office, where citizens can generate genuine change at the ballot box if they are sufficiently motivated. The 94.8% reelection rate we saw in the U.S. House in November is not 'change' not matter how presidents or pundits try to spin it. And, hence, we are getting the same thing we have gotten for the last decade -- more spending, more debt, more economic intervention.

If we want a stop to skyrocketing spending, debt, bailouts and the taxes that are a necessary consequence, we need representatives that are closer to the people. The nation should heed the tea partiers' call for term limits.

Door slams shut on NYC term limits

2009-04-29T14:35:00.006-04:00

Like when someone is dying from a long illness, you might fully expect it but it still hurts when the day arrives.

On April 28, a federal appeals court dismissed the lawsuit against New York City's overturning of the term limits law duly enacted and then reaffirmed by popular referenda in 1993 and 1996. After internal polling showed voters would yet again affirm term limits again in 2008, Mayor Bloomberg -- who desperately wanted to serve a third term -- decided to simply ignore the earlier referenda and lengthened term limits from 8 to 12 years via a simple council vote. Oh yes, it lengthened the terms of the council too. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.

As this move nullified two citizen referenda, a group of citizens rose up to fight it in the courts. As summarized by the New York Times, they had three main arguments:

The term-limits extension violated First and Fourteenth Amendment rights because it did not allow voters to be part of the decision and because it was approved by the same elected officials who will benefit from it.
It violated a state law that mandates a referendum to modify or annul any law enacted by one.
It violated the city’s conflict of interest regulations because it conferred a political benefit to the elected officials who approved it.

No dice, the Second Circuit Court said Tuesday. But the court did recognize that "[s]ome feel that [governor and city council's action] disregards the will of the people as expressed by the 1993 Voter Initiative and 1996 Referendum" and that this "may be a justifiable reaction."

Yes, the court is right about that much.

Oklahoma pondering logical next step

2009-04-21T09:57:00.007-04:00

In 1990, Oklahoma was the first state to vote in term limits for its state legislature. Nearly 20 years later, the success of this experiment is encouraging the state government to extend term limits to cover more elective government offices.

The Oklahoma legislature and the governor are term limited. But if voters approve a constitutional amendment in November 2010, 8-year term limits will also be imposed on politicians employed as lieutenant governor, state auditor and inspector, attorney general, state treasurer, labor commissioner, state schools superintendent and insurance commissioner to serve no more than eight cumulative years in office.

Currently, the governor is limited to eight consecutive years but, if the amendment passes, will also be limited to eight cumulative years.

"Since term limits were approved by the people for the state legislature, there is increasingly a wide mix of backgrounds and careers found at the state capitol," said House Speaker Chris Benge. "This change will ensure fresh faces and new ideas are continuously entering the political process."

Indeed, a recent study suggests that term-limited Oklahoma – although not without its specific problems and challenges – has been one of the best-managed states in the nation.

Odds favor another term limits victory at the polls. The people continue to love term limits as much as lobbyists despise them. In a July 2007 poll by Pulse Consulting, 77 percent answered ‘yes’ to the following question: "In 2008, Oklahoma voters may be asked to vote on a measure that would establish term limits for statewide elected officials. If approved, the new law would create eight-year term limits on executive offices. If this measure were on the ballot today, would you vote for or against it?" Only 17 percent said they would vote against it.

Citizens and a couple of committed legislators have been pushing for this idea for some time. A similar bill failed in the 2008 legislative session. One wonders if the recent heavy-handed attempt by the Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson to crack down on citizen petitioning has given new impetus to the effort to expand the state’s most successful citizen initiative campaign ever. The new term limit would, after all, apply to him.

Or perhaps its success this year is due more to the economic crisis, which is forcing legislators to make tough spending decisions in light of dropping revenues. It is in such times that the flexibility of term-limited legislators versus entrenched incumbents -- with their long-term relationships with special interests -- becomes that much clearer.

Of course, there are other, more permanent reasons. Term limits bring fresh ideas and a broader range of experience to these positions and discourage corruption. Plus, as political scientist Rick Farmer of Akron University has pointed out, Oklahoma has an incumbent reelection rate over 90 percent, just like everywhere else. Citizen access and change can only effectively occur in open, competitive races – the kind term limits mandate every eight years.

This amendment can also be seen as a corrective to one arguable defect of the 1990 law: the fact that some of the state elective officials were term limited (governor, legislature) and some were not (lt. governor, other constitutional officers). This amendment puts these positions back on a level playing field.

Special thanks are in order for long-time term limits supporter Sen. Randy Brogdon (Owasso) and Rep. Jason Murphey (Guthrie) for their work to get this amendment to the people.

Now it's up to us.

Florida pol uses disabled vets for cover

2009-04-04T11:55:00.006-04:00

I thought that this year's booby prize for hubris was securely held by South Dakota's attempt to cripple term limits just months after a statewide voter referendum reaffirmed them. But that was before news arrived from Florida.

A bill has been floated in the Florida State Senate by Sen. Dave Aronberg (D-Greenacres) that would extend a popular property tax discount to a broader group of disabled veterans. Who could vote against that, right? Well, that's what Sen. Mike Bennett (R-Bradenton) thinks too, so he's used his power as chair of the Senate Community Affairs to tack on an unrelated amendment to extend term limits from eight to 12 years!

Never mind that Florida voters labored to put the 8-year term limit on the ballot and then approved it at the polls by 77 percent in 1992. Or that the legislature's last attempt to gut the law in 2005 was timidly retracted in the face of active citizen outrage. Or that for most of Florida's term limits period, the state has been considered among the best managed in America.

Sen. Bennett claims that he is not doing this just for himself, and there is surely truth to this. After all, Sen. Bennett has distinguished himself as a special interest robot, submitting legislation at the behest of nearly every lobby under the Florida sun. So far this session, he has submitted over 70 bills, more than any other legislator.

Sen. Aronberg is not an innocent victim either, in case your wondering. He is on record supporting the amendment, which makes you wonder if this bill's only real purpose is to serve as cover for these guys' political machinations.

Fortunately, the bill would have to go through the House first, and House Majority Leader Adam Hasner (R-Delray Beach) is skeptical. "I think this is disrespectful to those men and women who have served our country and are disable veterans," he said, predicting its demise in the House. But, if it passed the House, it would still have to be approved by a 60 percent majority of the voters on the 2010 ballot.

Fat chance! But in spite of the fact that the outcome of such an election is nearly certain, experience from other states indicate that millions would be spent by special interests to topple term limits and a good deal of personal contributions of time, money and effort of voters would be required to defend the law.

Isn't this kind of arrogance part of the reason we support term limits in the first place?

James Frevert, hero

2009-02-18T22:18:00.008-05:00

There are some people – although not nearly enough of them – who are successful in their life's work, but who don’t stop there. They take the time to acquire a understanding of the value of the free society we live in and make it a personal mission to preserve and improve it. Civil society requires such men and women to survive and prosper.

James Frevert of North Palm Beach, Fla., was one of them. Jim died on Friday at age 86.

For as long as I have known him, at least 25 years, Jim had dedicated time and resources to educational and civic causes. It is for one of these that I owe him personal thanks.

In 2001-02, I was campaign manager for a citizens referendum in Palm Beach County to limit the terms of our county commissioners to eight years in office. We had over 75 petitioners and contributors that helped put the issue on the ballot and, in November 2002, 60% of voters approved the term limit and it became law.

All of the volunteers played an important role in the victory, but a few of them were decisive. The truth is that without Jim Frevert, the outcome would have been different. In fact, the effort would never have got off the ground. Please note, he derived no personal gain from this campaign, but acted only to further what he thought was right and proper. I don't think his name ever even made the papers.

When the first Palm Beach County Commissioner is term limited out in 2010, please take a moment to remember Jim Frevert.

I had the opportunity to thank him in life, but my gratitude is such that I wanted to share it with you. He was a world traveler, as everyone who knew him knows, but more than that he also really cared about the world. He set an example for us to follow. He will be missed.

A step toward dictatorship in Venezuela

2009-02-16T21:21:00.006-05:00

"Those who voted 'yes' today voted for socialism," President Hugo Chavez crowed after his victory in Sunday's national referendum to overturn Venezuela's term limits law for all offices.

Unsuccessful in his first attempt in December 2007, Chavez pulled out all stops utilizing his vast national resources and network of recipients of government largesse. His ads dominated the state-controlled media and pressure was put on his nearly 2 million state employees to campaign and vote for the measure. He also slyly broadened the term limit repeal to all offices, earning him a much broader range of influential supporters desperate to see the constitutional amendment pass. It did, with 54% of the vote.

Chavez told supporters the election was a mandate to speed his transformation of Venezuela into a socialist state. In celebration, he sent fireworks flying over the rooftops of the city while his supporters filled the streets, waving red flags and honking their car horns.

While some fraud certainly played a role, it appears so far that it was the rapidly growing powers of the Chavez incumbency that carried the day. And now, it will be permanent.

Opposition leader Omar Barboza said Chavez power is enormous with the courts, legislature and electoral council under his thumb. Term limits were the last thing limiting his ambitions.

"Effectively this will become a dictatorship," Barboza told The Associated Press. "It's control of all the powers, lack of separation of powers, unscrupulous use of state resources, persecution of adversaries."

The immortal presidency of Saint Obama

2009-02-14T09:26:00.009-05:00

In the afterglow of the immaculate coronation of our new savior-president, the idea has been floated to allow Barack Obama to serve for life.

Thomas Jefferson would not approve. In 1807, the two-term president and term limits supporter wrote: “If some termination to the services of the chief magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution or supplied in practice, his office, nominally for years, will in fact become for life; and history shows how easily that degenerates into an inheritance.”

Our first president set the precedent, declining to run for a third term, believing that unlimited tenure is unrepublican. Jefferson signalled his intention to follow suit in 1805, when he wrote to John Taylor that "General Washington set the example of voluntary retirement after eight years. I shall follow it, and a few more precedents will oppose the obstacle of habit to anyone after a while who shall endeavor to extend his term. Perhaps it may beget a disposition to establish it by an amendment of the Constitution."

Eventually, we did, with the passage of the 22nd Amendment in 1947 after the death of Franklin Roosevelt, the first president to violate our revolutionary tradition of term limits.

However, in January it was reported that the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary was considering a bill from Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY), H. J. Res. 5, which, according to the bill’s language, proposes "an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as president."

The proposal is so contrary to the both founding American traditions and the current public will that I doubt it will even pick up cosponsors, but it is a sparkling example of how power worships power and -- again in Jefferson's words -- freedom requires eternal vigilance.

South Dakota: If first you don't succeed...

2009-02-14T08:42:00.009-05:00

Term limits touch the most delicate nerve in the body of a professional politician. Sometimes it seems like the prospect of having to find another job -- or even face a competitive campaign for another office -- is akin to death for them. They'll go to any length to hang on to the perks and power. Their machinations can be remarkably brazen.

Consider South Dakota. In 1992, 64% of South Dakotans voted to limits the terms of their legislators to eight years in office. Politicians tried to unshackle themselves last year, putting a term limits repeal on the ballot in November 2008. This time 76% of voters embraced eight-year term limits and rejected the repeal.

Ah, but that was three months ago. On Feb. 9, the South Dakota Senate approved 21-14 a bill (SJR3) that would lengthen the South Dakota term limit to 12 years. Maybe the voters changed their mind over the holidays? No, polling from last week show that 68% oppose the proposed longer terms and even expose citizen anger that the issue is being brought up again.

How are the politicians going to sell this to the voters after such a resounding support for term limits in November? Looking at other states may provide a clue.

Ever since term limits were imposed on state legislatures in the 1990s, professional politicians have been searching for the right way to package a term limits repeal. They haven't found it yet, as every attempt to sell a repeal to voters have failed at the ballot box, including three times (California, Maine and South Dakota) in the last year alone. The politicians have had the best success, relatively speaking, when they can craft an anti-term limits bill that they can market as being pro-term limits.

That's what they are attempting in South Dakota. SJR3 would increase the length of Senate terms to four years from the current two, a change which -- under the current 4-term limit -- would actually stretch the term limit out to 16 years. So, SJR3 would also "strengthen" South Dakota's term limits by reducing the limit from four terms to three. Get it? Voting for SJR3 would make South Dakota's term limits law tougher!

Experience in other states (California tried a trick like this last February) shows that their scheme might poll well at the beginning, backed by a hunk of special interest money, but by election time the trick will be exposed and term limits will win again no much how much public resources are wasted in the attempt.

Case against OK3 dropped

2009-01-26T08:49:00.004-05:00

With the 10th U.S. Court of Appeals -- as well as simple honesty and decency -- weighing in against him, Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson relented and withdrew his politically motivated legal attack on the Oklahoma 3.

If you recall, in December the court struck down as unconstitutional the law that Edmondson was using to threaten Rick Carpenter, a Tulsa political activist; Susan Johnson, head of National Voter Outreach; and Paul Jacob, president of Citizens in Charge and former executive director of U.S. Term Limits. Edmondson responded not with an apology, but with an attempt to save the unconstitutional law. Fortunately, the court refused Edmondson's request for a rehearing and he was forced to concede.

There are two key lessons to take from this case.

First, the political class will go to great lengths to oppose any limitations on their power. The measures that arouse the ire of Edmondson and his enablers were the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, a measure to cap state spending; the other, a property rights measure called Protect Our Homes. The fact that these limitations on government were being advanced through citizen referenda made them ever the more threatening to the Oklahoma establishment.

Second, the good guys often win and it is worth our time to try. The First Amendment guarantees our right to petition the government and because of the OK3 case we have another precedent that this all-important amendment is still in force. Let's use it.

Hugo Chavez pushing his limits

2009-01-15T17:41:00.024-05:00

In the United States, we view term limits as a good government reform that empowers citizens relative to public officials. To view term limits so casually is a luxury of our stable democracy.

In many other parts of the world, instability and authoritarian ideologies raise the stakes for such reforms. In shaky democracies like Venezuela, term limits are one of the last safeguards against tyranny.

Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez has been successfully consolidating power through nationalization of businesses, closing down opposition media, sharing his oil money with supporters and fixing elections. Now, for the second time in three years, Chavez is trying to make his exalted position permanent by abolishing presidential term limits. Fortunately, to do so requires a popular vote and Chavez isn't yet secure enough in his power to simply strike down the term limits by decree. However, he will try to fiddle with the election results. The election will likely be held in March.

In response, people have taken to the streets. In the words of the Associated Press caption to the Jan. 14 photo above, "Venezuelan riot police fired rubber bullets against university students in Caracas Wednesday, after thousands demonstrated against a proposed referendum to end term limits on elected offices. Student leaders warn of a dictatorship if President Hugo Chavez engineers continuous re-elections."

Pelosi & Co. ditch committee term limits

2009-01-13T08:00:00.001-05:00

In a triumph of seniority over merit, the U.S. House -- led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- officially ditched committee chair term limits with the passage of a new rules package on Jan. 6.

Term limits on committee chairs was originally passed in 1995 as part of the GOP's Contract with America. Over 80 percent of House members voted in favor of the rule. And as polling from October shows, the public's desire for term limits has not diminished one bit since that time.

Ironically, the biggest losers from the regression to unlimited tenure are the relatively conservative 'blue dog' Democrats, the stars of the 2006 elections that put the Democrats back in control of the House. But these new Congressmen are now being pushed to the back of the bus, as the senior leadership will now control the levers of power indefinitely.

Yes, the new rules package is a power grab pure and simple. Call it a re-centralization of power.

The move is also a dramatic reversal of Pelosi's position just a few years ago. Back in 2004 while in the minority, Rep. Pelosi was quite eloquent about adding additional protections of minority rights under House rules. As John Fund pointed out in the Wall Street Journal on Jan. 9, Rep. Pelosi was making a valid point. For example, in 2003 he majority Republicans held an open roll call vote for three hours on their unfortunate Medicare drug entitlement until they twisted enough arms to get the votes they needed.

But now in power, she has thrown that old rhetoric out the window. Something tells me this is not the change voters were clamoring for in November.

Michigan term limits: So far, so good

2009-01-12T17:00:00.001-05:00

Thanks to Dave Horenstein and the Detroit National Political Examiner for printing my full response to Horenstein' s Jan. 6 op-ed, “Term limits haven't eliminated career politicians,” in their publication.

In his op-ed, Dave Horenstein made the case that since many term-limited legislators run for new offices somehow legislative term limits have failed.

This is a straw man argument that ignores the real goals and benefits of term limits.

Term limits have been undeniably successful in promoting rotation in office in Lansing. In non-term limited legislatures across the country, including the U.S. Congress, the reelection rate of incumbents who are not under indictment approaches 100 percent.

In 2008 – a year of change – 94.8 percent of all U.S. House incumbents seeking reelection got their wish. It’s practically automatic. And, naturally, all the seniority and power resides with this entrenched elite.

Why does this occur? Because in legislatures without term limits, special interest support and press coverage for incumbents is automatic and the success rate for challengers is so low that the two parties do not adequately support their own candidates -- if they field challengers at all. In the 2008 U.S. House elections there were 56 unopposed seats and the elections were simply canceled.

In Lansing, on the other hand, seats necessarily change hands every six years in the house and eight in the Senate. Here is where Michiganders see the most obvious benefit of term limits: regular, open, competitive elections.

This gives more weight to Michiganders votes, provides greater opportunities for citizens to run for office, brings a wider range of experience to the legislature, broadens the circle of those with intimate understanding of the legislative process, reduces opportunities for graft and remedies interdistrict inequities of power due to seniority.

Meanwhile, ousted incumbents who seek new seats are not shoo-ins, but must run as a non-incumbents and often face a challenge by another term-limited politician in a competitive, open race. It is such races where voters face a real choice.

If it is indeed true that Lansing attracts more than its share of careerists, this cannot be due to a reform that throws a roadblock in their way. Instead, one should look to the fact that Lansing offers a full-time, year-round job at the second-highest legislative salary in the nation.

Maybe term limits are just the first step in a reform process that’s not finished yet. But so far, so good.

Palm Beach loses two term limits heroes

2009-01-11T11:44:00.007-05:00

A term limits hero passed away on Dec. 5, William V. "Bill" Hayes of Palm Beach Shores, Fla. He was 73.

Hayes was the chair of the Palm Beach County Term Limits Committee that sponsored the successful 2002 referendum that limited the terms of Palm Beach County commissioners to eight years in office.

Hayes was a retired U.S. Navy captain, having served as a submariner and in Naval intelligence as well as a Naval Attache in Oslo Norway from 1979 to 1981. Bill retired as director of Perry Technologies (Lockheed Martin) in 2006 and was active in numerous organizations advancing individual freedom and limited government, including the Heritage Foundation, James Madison Institute and the Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida.

Hayes death closely followed the death of musician Lee Coleman of Lake Worth, 90, who was a stalwart volunteer petitioner in the same term limits effort.

Sadly, both missed the startling news that their nemesis of the term limits campaign, commissioner Mary McCarty, was indicted for corruption in early January.

Thank you, Bill and Lee. You will be missed.

Another term limit foe indicted in Palm Beach

2009-01-08T11:34:00.013-05:00

Now we know why holding on to her county commission seat was so important. It was announced today that Palm Beach County Commissioner Mary McCarty has been indicted and will plead guilty of accepting gifts to steer business to special interests -- including her husband's bond underwriting firm.

She told the Palm Beach Post she expects to serve "a significant period of incarceration."

In doing so, she will follow her former colleagues on the commission Warren Newell and Tony Masilotti, both of whom got 5-year federal prison terms last year.

Commissioners McCarty and Newell were the most active opponents of the successful 2002 referendum to limit the terms of Palm Beach County Commissioners to eight years in office starting in 2010. I was the campaign manager for the effort.

Newell spoke against the measure at public meetings and called a referendum organizer at home -- my father, George -- and pleaded that the campaign be halted.

McCarty went further. As chair of the Republican Party of Palm Beach County, she was the key reason the GOP did not endorse the referendum in spite of overwhelming support from the party's rank and file. McCarty actually instructed all the Republican Clubs around the county not to permit me to speak at their meetings and collect signed petitions. To their credit, most did anyway.

Naturally, the suspected corruption of the commissioners was an important impetus for the term limits effort. I recall that many of the petitioners who spent their evenings and weekends in parking lots across the county with clipboards were motivated by McCarty specifically. As I note here, one of the benefits of term limits is that they contribute to cleaner and more transparent government.

Sometimes the good guys win and justice is done. It is this experience that attracts so many to the term limits movement.

Court strikes down petition law; OK3 vindicated

2008-12-23T06:27:00.005-05:00

On Dec. 18, a unanimous 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down as unconstitutional Oklahoma’s law that bans non-residents from circulating petitions to place proposed laws and constitutional amendments on the ballot.

The law was challenged by a group known as Yes on Term Limits Inc. which wants to circulate petitions to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot to limit terms of state officials.

This is a victory also for Paul Jacob and the Oklahoma 3, who were being prosecuted on felony charges under this law, in spite of the fact that they were following the law as explained to them by state officials. The real crime was pushing a tax-and-spending limitation amendment which -- like term limitation -- is anathema to the political establishment.

Attorney General Drew Edmondson has not officially withdrawn his legal attack against the OK3 and also vowed to appeal the decision. Of course he will. Authoritarians have always objected to the citizens' right to petition for redress of grievances. That's why it had to be singled out for inclusion in the first amendment.

"It appears the Oklahoma Three received an early Christmas present and Edmondson got his well-deserved chunk of coal," said Oklahoma State Senator Randy Brogdon. "Tis the season to do the right thing. Hopefully Edmondson will withdraw any further lawsuits."

Sen. Brownback to uphold term limits pledge

2008-12-19T21:43:00.010-05:00

Back in 1998, Sen. Sam Brownback -- an advocate of term limits -- put pen to paper and pledged to serve only two full terms in the U.S. Senate and then step aside to permit another Kansan to take the seat. On Thursday, he officially announced his intention to honor his pledge.

In a perfect world, this would be an unremarkable event: A politician makes an unambiguous promise and then keeps it. But in our world, where politicians face enormous temptations and pressure to distance themselves from such promises, this simple act of integrity is worthy of special note.

For this reason, I flew up from my home in South Florida (72 degrees, sun) to East Kansas (16 degrees, ice) to assist in making the announcement. Together we held joint press conferences in Olathe, Topeka and Wichita on Thursday.

For the Topeka Capital Journal and Kansas City Star's take on it, see http://cjonline.com/stories/121908/loc_369256809.shtml and http://www.kansascity.com/637/story/943772.html.

Sen. Brownback first took the seat in 1996, in a special election to fill out then-Sen. Bob Dole's term when Dole ran for president. Since then, Sen. Brownback won his two subsequent elections with increasing margins and he continues to enjoy high approval ratings today. And yet, at 52 -- a relative babe in the Senate where the average age exceeds 60 -- he is retiring from the senate to start a new chapter of his life.

In doing this, Sen. Brownback joins an elite crowd of politicians who have signed the U.S. Term Limits pledge and then kept their word. Sen. Jim DeMint, Sen. Tom Coburn and South Carolina Mark Sanford are all pledge honorers who moved on to other offices.

Many other politicians have reneged on their promises. Tough luck for them: while several pledge breakers have continued to retain their current seats, none have ever won higher office.

“As fellow Kansans know, your word is your bond,” Sen. Brownback said. “If a man breaks his word, it breaks the man.”

Vince Flynn's term limits of a very different kind

2008-12-13T11:14:00.019-05:00

I had been intrigued by the title for some time, but I finally picked up and read the novel Term Limits by Vince Flynn (Simon & Schuster, 1997).

In this fast-paced political action thriller on the Tom Clancy mold, a secret group of American ex-commandos publish a list of demands and start assassinating Congress members who defy them. Their demands are of a sort that the Club for Growth might make, sans sniper fire, such as reducing spending, freezing taxes, balancing the budget and -- my favorite -- using zero-based budgeting. Ha!

If those sound like far-fetched terrorist demands, just wait until you find out how a corrupt White House decides to fight back. By the end of the book, you will find yourself thinking the terrorists are the good guys, particularly when they issue challenges like this one: "Do not test us again or we will be forced to impose more term limits."

Needless to say, the term limits of the title are not the same kind promoted by this blog. But that's not to say there were no real-world political lessons in this book. In fact, Flynn surely understands and supports term limits of a more traditional sort. Consider this exchange between a lobbyist and a young freshman Congressman:

"[Rep.] O'Rourke, if you vote no on the president's budget, the American Farmers Association will be left with no other choice than to support your opponent next year." O'Rourke shook his head and said, "Nice try, but I'm not running for a second term."

Not only does he see how term limits encourage independent thinking, but in this description of a career politician -- and assassins' target -- he also clearly sees how tenure corrupts over time:

For the last thirty-four years he'd survived scandal after scandal and hung on to that seat like a screaming child clutching his favorite toy. Fitzgerald had been a politician his entire adult life, and he knew nothing else. He'd grown numb to the day-to-day dealings of the nation's capital. The forty-plus years of lying, deceit, deal cutting, career trashing and partisan politics had been so ingrained in Fitzgerald that he not only thought his behavior was acceptable, he truly believed it was the only way to do business.

At one point, fiction and fact merge when a journalist announces.

"The assassinations have thust into the spotlight some reforms that the American people have endorsed for some time. The idea of term limits has an approval rating of almost 90 percent."

In sum, Term Limits is guilty-pleasure reading for frustrated fiscal conservatives who like action movies. If that describes you, you may wish to pick up the paperback version of this New York Times bestseller, still in print.

Illinois' Quinn a mighty reformer

2008-12-10T12:54:00.013-05:00

Most likely Gov. Rod Blagojevich will be impeached or will voluntarily resign over his attempted sale of Sen. Barack Obama's now-empty Senate seat, but either way Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn is likely to be the next governor of Illinois.

Who is Pat Quinn?

Lt. Gov. Quinn has held the #2 spot in Illinois for the last six years and is, oddly, an opponent of the governor and corrupt machine politics generally. This is possible because, in Illinois, the candidates for the governor and lieutenant governor positions run on the same ticket in the general election as a team, but they are chosen separately in the primaries.

Although of the same party, Quinn -- a genuine populist reformer -- cuts a strikingly different political profile than the corrupt careerist Blagojevich.

In the 1970s Quinn, then a tax attorney, led an effort to give the state's voters the citizen initiative. He collected the necessary signatures, but the Illinois Supreme Court wouldn't let it appear on the ballot. His next big project was to push a measure that would have limited the terms of state elected officials. As those who follow the term limits issue know, this is very difficult in states without the citizen initiative process. Again, the machine politicians won.

Undaunted, Quinn launched a 2008 effort to give Illinois voters the right of recall. Perhaps learning from his term limits experience, he called for a vote on a state constitutional convention to take up this issue. A Cook County Circuit Judge tossed this latest reform measure off the ballot.

"In a state that has more than its share of crooks and people who go along to get along, Pat Quinn stands out as someone who takes on the powers-that-be," Howie Rich, chairman of U.S. Term Limits, told the Wall Street Journal.

The 1967 Bob Dylan song The Mighty Quinn tells the nursery rhyme-like story of the arrival in town of the Eskimo Quinn, who brings great and positive change. Since the lieutenant governor has arrived on the political scene he has surely made an honest effort to do that. Surely the Illinois power brokers are uncomfortable with his likely and imminent promotion. What will he try next?

"You'll not see nothing like the mighty Quinn," sang Dylan. Let's hope he's right.

Blagojevich's third term

2008-12-10T09:18:00.012-05:00

Up until last week, Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) was hinting he was going to run for a third term in the governor's office, but now he's more likely to get a term in prison.

That's one kind of term limit. But the more traditional term limitations also contribute to cleaner and more transparent government in several ways.

First, regular rotation in office necessarily widens the circle of those with an intimate knowledge of the office. With an entrenched incumbency, either in the executive or legislative branches, this knowledge as well as institutional memory is more closely held. Rotation disperses it and makes it easier for outsiders to peer in and blow the whistle when necessary.

Second, the hubris that leads to corruption is a function of tenure. In most cases corrupt politicians were not originally elected, perhaps decades ago, with the hubris and sense of entitlement that leads to their ultimate self destruction. Maybe they were even led to run for office for public spirited reasons. Ah, but that was long ago...

Ronald Reagan put it better when he'd say that candidates look at Washington and see a cesspool, but after a while in office they start seeing a hot tub.

Third, shortened tenure reduces the opportunity for corruption. Even a politician with a flawed character requires an opportunity for the corruption to manifest itself. Tenure offers the knowledge and opportunity necessary. Mixed with the arrogance of office, born partly of tenure, many politicians give in to temptation.

Gov. Blagojevich was caught; many are not. It behooves us build our public institutions in ways that retard such behaviors across the board. After all, if the FBI had not been listening to his phone calls, the governor could potentially have been seated for a third term, more corrupt and more powerful than ever.

95% of House incumbents win in 2008

2008-12-05T15:30:00.015-05:00

Ah, change. In the 2006 elections, the Democrats took the Congress. In 2008, they expanded their gains in the Congress and took the presidency. At the headline level, certainly, we got change in bold, 60-point type.

But let's read further into the story. It turns out that the change occured only at the margins -- in open seats, where both parties put up serious candidates, threw their weight behind them and then sweated while the voters exercised their power to choose.

In the bulk of the races, on the other hand, incumbents nearly always won as they nearly always do. In 2006, 94% of House incumbents won; in 2008, 94.8% of House incumbents won.

You might ask, how can this be? But a better question is, how could this not be? An incumbent benefits from numerous advantages, the largest of which is probably the automatic support of special interests. This overwhelming lead discourages serious candidates from running and encourages parties to commit their limited resources elsewhere. In most cases, incumbents face underfunded challengers without serious party support, many of whom are simply gadflys.

Or, incumbents go unchallenged and the election is canceled altogether. Elections were canceled in 56 House districts this year.

Change, then, is made possible by open and competitive elections -- something that term limits mandate in every district at least once every eight years.

Chavez tries to topple term limits -- otra vez

2008-12-02T06:09:00.014-05:00

Hugo Chavez is an ambitious man. The Fidel Castro acolyte is centralizing power in democratic Venezuela through censorship and nationalization as part of his 'Bolivarian socialist revolution' which he apparently aims to lead, caudillo-style, indefinitely.

But there is one thing standing in his way: term limits.

According to the Venezuelan constitution, Chavez' second and last six-year term will expire in 2013. He tried to overturn this pesky limit on his power in December 2007, but was rebuffed at the ballot box.

This week he called on supporters to gear up for yet another referendum. At least he is going back to the people; a month or so ago in New York City voters were not so lucky.

"We're going to achieve it," Chavez told supporters in Caracas last Sunday. "We're going to demonstrate who rules in Venezuela." Then the head of state and part-time recording artist sang out "Uh, ah, Chavez no se va." That is, "Chavez is not going."

We'll see. With mixed results in November's regional elections, inflation topping 30 percent and a plunging price of oil, his time as a popular leader may be running out. If democracy in Venezuela outlives Chavez, term limits may turn out to be the decisive factor.

Illinois rep calls for gubernatorial term limits

2008-11-29T09:13:00.006-05:00

Illinois State Rep. Mike Boland gets it.

In November, Rep. Boland (D-Moline) announced his plans to introduce a constitutional amendment to limit the term of the Illinois governor to two 4-year terms and establish a recall process. Illinois would be the 38th state with gubernatorial term limits.

“Incumbent governors have many political advantages, from patronage to big money,” Boland said in a press release. “If we open up the gubernatorial position at least once every decade, we will generate competition and empower voters.”

Rep. Boland toured the state in November to announce and pitch his proposal, which he says would address Illinois' culture of political corruption. He expects public support and official resistance.

"This is going to be resisted by political establishments," he said. "People in power like things the way they are and that way hasn't been working for the tax payers."

This would be a big break for term limits in a state without a term limits tradition at the state or local level. Nine of the largest 10 cities in America have term limits, with Chicago being the exception.

Filipinos frown on term limits repeal

2008-11-26T17:18:00.008-05:00

The dateline for this one is Manila, but it could be Caracas or even New York City. It is a universal and eternal fact of life that citizens love terms limits and incumbent politicians hate them.

The latest datum is a new poll from the Philippines, where a move is afoot to lengthen or repeal term limits for the president, vice president and the legislature as part of a package of constitutional changes. Outside the capitol building, only 15 percent of the population approve of weakening term limits, according to a new Social Weather Stations poll. A full 64 percent oppose it.

Currently, the constitution mandates term limits at nearly all levels. For a survey of international term limits, see LINKS in the left-hand column on this blog.

Sen. Washington planning Carson City coup

2008-11-23T08:34:00.005-05:00

One of the ironies of term limits politics is that the opposition to term limits more often than not prove the need for term limits. Specifically, the opposition clumsily demonstrate that the interests of the officeholder and of the citizenry diverge widely over time, with the career politicians identifying so closely with the interests of the political class they no longer even recognize the interests of the people.

Case in point: In Nevada, where courts recently rebuffed a politician-led attack on the states 12-year legislative term limit, the soon-to-be term limited Sen. Maurice Washington (R-Sparks) is calling for a new constitutional amendment to repeal the limit. Sen. Washington, publically at least, made the case for repeal pointing to his reverence for 'the vote.'

But considering that term limits were enacted by a vote of 70 percent in 1994 and then reaffirmed by Nevadans in a second vote as required by Nevada law, and that term limits were enacted or reaffirmed everywhere across the nation they were voted on on Nov. 4, it is glaringly apparent the only vote he really reveres are votes for him and his fellow incumbents.

Mayor Bloomberg's popularity dives

2008-11-21T16:02:00.007-05:00

A new poll shows that Michael Bloomberg's popularity has dropped nine percent due primarily to the New York City mayor's self-interested tinkering with term limits.

Claiming that his leadership is indispensible to lead New York City through the current financial crisis (there being so few financially savvy people in New York City, I suppose), Bloomberg prodded his city council on Oct. 23 to lengthen his -- and the council's -- term limit from two to three terms. This was after two popular referenda to enact then affirm them.

As a result, Bloomberg's approval rating has dropped to its lowest point in three years. A new Marist poll shows 59 percent of voters think he is doing an excellent or good job, down from 68 percent a month ago. It's the first time his popularity has fallen below 60 percent since August 2005.

This is still high, but next he has to answer for his arrogance throughout a electoral campaign amidst a difficult economic environment in which he is raising taxes substantially. Bloomberg's numbers will come tumbling down and it was term limits that pushed him off the top of the hill.

Allan Carl "Al" Schmid, 1929-2008

2008-11-19T15:54:00.006-05:00

The term limits movement lost a pioneer upon the death of Allan Carl "Al" Schmid Nov. 16 in his home in Saginaw, MI.

From his obit, we are reminded that Schmid was a principal architect of modern legislative term limits in America, having proposed a term limits proposal “A Sunset Law for Legislators” as early as 1980. He was a co-author of two major amendments to the Michigan Constitution: the 1992 Term Limits Amendment and the 1978 Headlee Tax Limitation Amendment.

Schmid requested the hymn “God Bless America” be sung at a brief memorial service, which will be held for family, friends, colleagues, and well wishers at the Peace Lutheran Church, 3427 Adams Avenue at Mackinaw, Saginaw, MI 48602 next Tuesday, November 25 at 1:00 P.M. It was his wish, and his family has requested that, in lieu of flowers, well wishers make donations in his honor to the U.S. Term Limits Foundation 9900 Main St. Suite 303, Fairfax, VA 22031 or, in the alternative, to the American Diabetes Association Foundation, P.O. Box 11454, Alexandria, VA 22312.

Thank you, Al, for all your hard work for individual freedom and limited government.

Who says crime doesn't pay?

2008-11-19T12:59:00.011-05:00

In spite of the felony conviction and electoral defeat of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), the Republican of longest tenure ever in the U.S. Senate, the 40-year veteran is nonetheless eligible for a $122,000 annual pension, complete with cost-of-living adjustments.

Remember Rep. Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL), the 35-year House veteran and former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee who was convicted in the House Post Office scandal in 1994? He still takes home $126,000 a year.

Who knows what lurks in the hearts of evil men? But when you hear these cases you have to suspect that tenure and lack of competitive elections play a role in the downfall of such once-respected national leaders. Certainly they were not sent to the Senate so many decades ago with the arrogance, sense of entitlement and opportunity that led to their ultimate self-destruction.

After the inconveniences following their respective convictions, both gentlemen are able to ponder such questions for the rest of their lives in leisure -- on our dime.

The more things change...

2008-11-19T08:16:00.007-05:00

The Democrats decisively won this month's elections promising change and Republican leaders are promising to change their ways as a result. Don't hold your breath.

Yesterday, the Senate Republican Caucus met and easily voted down a series of rule changes proposed by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) that would have included imposing term limits on GOP leaders (defeated 36-5) and also the party's seats on the powerful Appropriations Committee (defeated 36-4). Then, the Senators reappointed roughly the same group of leaders that presided pre-Nov. 4. In other words, nothing changed and the system continues to be rigged against it.

Sen. DeMint told The Hill that term limits would "reduce the concentration of power and get more members involved." Yes, he's right, that is what term limits do. Term limits open up seats and permit greater access, share power and hands-on knowledge with a wider group of people, and bring a wider range of ideas and experience to governmental bodies.

DeMint also noted that "Change is hard, and I didn't expect to win." Unfortunately, he was right in this case too.

But don't worry. Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) assures us that changes in the rules or the leadership aren't necessary and, in fact, that the changes were hardly discussed by the caucus. The Republicans lost due to "circumstances out of our control," he said.

Ron Paul: "I support term limits"

2008-11-15T10:32:00.000-05:00

You normally wouldn’t expect a 10-term Congressman to be a big term limits supporter but, as this year’s primary campaign made clear, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) isn’t a typical Congressman.

I ran into the Congressman on the campaign trail in Fort Lauderdale last year where we chatted briefly about the prospects for Congressional term limits. Yes, he’s still on board, he assured me. He also inquired about Paul Jacob, the former executive director of U.S. Term Limits.

Rep. Paul most recently reiterated his support for term limits publically in his Dec. 23, 2007, appearance on Meet the Press, where interviewer Tim Russert grilled the Congressman for the alleged contradiction between his tenure and his support for limits on tenure.

"I support term limits," Rep. Paul told Russert. But Rep. Paul pointed out that he does not and has never supported the idea of self-limiting, but only a term limit requirement on the entire Congress.

“Matter of fact, some of the best people that I worked with, who were the most principled, came in on voluntary term limits,” said Paul. “So some of the good people left.” To get the institutional benefits of term limits, it has to be applied to the whole body.

So is this just political double-speak? Not in Rep. Paul’s case. In his first stint in Congress (1976-1984), well before the term limits explosion of the early 1990s, he was the first representative in modern history to submit a term limits bill for Congress. He voted for all the term limits bills during the Contract with America era and continues to publically support the idea.

He says term limits are a first step, but insists that we must go further.

“To restrict and reduce the power of incumbency, we should address the sweeping powers that the federal government possesses,” he wrote in a pro-term limits press release some years back. He also called for the abolition of the lucrative Congressional pension plan which he does not participate in.

To sign the petition calling for Congressional term limits, see: www.termlimits.org.

Algeria inspired by NYC's example

2008-11-12T22:09:00.000-05:00

President Abdelaziz Bouteflika of Algeria took a page out of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s playbook and pushed a compliant parliament to approve abolishing term limits, permitting the leader to run for a third term. It was approved today 500-21.

In New York, Mayor Bloomberg had his city council eliminate his term limits in October, nullifying popular voter referenda creating and affirming the limits in 1993 and 1996.

The Associated Press notes that in Algeria, just as in New York City, critics complained that the decision should have been made by a referendum, not a vote of the parliament. Further, “Some observers said a huge recent salary increase for lawmakers helped smooth passage of the elimination of the two-term limit.”

Sadi, the head of the opposition RCD secular party, also criticized the procedure of the vote. He objected to the fact that the vote was held by raised hands instead of by secret ballot, which prevented legislators from "exerting their free choice on this issue.”

Predictably, Bouteflika called the vote “historic” and said it would “enshrine … solid and durable institutions.” Yes, notably the Bouteflika administration.

Just as in New York, Bouteflika and his legislature pointed to a "national emergency" as the imperative to scrap term limits. He claims says that consistency in rule is important and can help boost democracy in the Africa nation.

"As with many other potentates elsewhere in the world," retired Algerian general Rachid Benyelles told Reuters, politely declining to mention Mayor Bloomberg by name, "he has always wanted to be a president for life."

WSJ: Nov. 4 'loudest referendum on term limits'

2008-11-12T22:06:00.000-05:00

NOV. 11, 2008 -- Lost in Obamamania, term limits had a banner day on Nov. 4. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal noticed and documented it in the Nov. 11 edition of the WSJ’s Political Diary under the headline “Terms of Entrenchment”:

“Earlier this year when New York's Michael Bloomberg announced he would seek to overhaul the city's term limit law so he could run for mayor again, the political class exalted. His move, now accomplished, was said to mark a backlash against term limits, a key agenda item for conservative government reformers.

“Not so fast. In last week's election, limits on politicians' time in office were enacted or reaffirmed by enormous margins nearly everywhere they were on the ballot in what might have been the loudest referendum for term limitation by voters ever.

“Louisiana voters said ‘yes' to term limits on elected state officials by a 70% to 30% margin, making the Bayou state the 15th with term limits. Meanwhile, South Dakota's lobbying community tried to overturn that state's term limits law, approved by voters 12 years earlier. Bad idea: 76% of voters said ‘hell, no.’ That was a bigger margin of victory than when term limits were originally instituted.

“In localities ranging from State College, Pennsylvania to Tracy, California and Memphis, Tennessee, voters approved term limits by two-to-one margins. Eight of the ten largest U.S. cities now have term limits. The only setback was a slight one, when San Antonio voters approved an extension of term limits to a maximum of eight years in office from the current four years.

“‘We won everywhere,’ declares U.S. Term Limits executive director Philip Blumel. ‘In state after state and town after town across America, term limits are gradually becoming the law of the land.’ An astonishing 83% of voters polled in October answered ‘yes’ to the following question: ‘Do you favor term limits on your elected officials?’ We're hardpressed to think of a single issue in America today that commands such levels of support. What the public is most eager to see is term limits on U.S. Congress but that, alas, will require a Constitutional Amendment approved by the careerists in Congress themselves. That's like asking a cat to put a bell on itself.

“Some fifteen years ago when the term limits movement was first gaining steam, then-Rep. Dan Rostenkowski huffed that term limits would lead to a ‘Congress of mediocrity.’ A decade and a half later, many voters think mediocrity in our public officials would be a vast improvement.”

Term Limits Win Everywhere Nov. 4

2008-11-12T22:00:00.001-05:00

NOV. 4, 2008 -- Here’s a complete list of term limits votes around the nation that I know about. If I forgot any, please let me know.

South Dakota (J) – repeals term limits on state legislature.
YES: 87,361 (24.27%)
NO: 272,551 (75.73%) TERM LIMITS WIN!

Memphis, TN – Places a maximum of two terms on the city council, mayor and other constitutional offices.
YES: 177,571 (78.23%) TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 49,420 (21.77%)

Shelby County, TN (365) – Places term limits on various city charteroffices to match limits on county commission and mayor
YES: 273,107 (78.59%) TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 74,409 (21.41%)

San Antonio, TX (1) – Extends term limits for city council
YES: 190,417 (51.6%) TERM LIMITS EXTENDED FROM 4 TO 8 YEARS
NO: 178,611 (48.4%)

Tracy, CA (T) – Places a 2 four-year term limit on the city council and mayor
YES: 12,613 (67.21%) TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 6,154 (32.79%)

Rowlett, TX — extends term limit from two to three terms.
YES: 8,953 (44%)
NO: 11,295 (56%) TERM LIMITS WIN!

State College Borough, PA — repeals term limits for borough council.
YES: 8,050 (46%)
NO: 9,567 (54%) TERM LIMITS WIN!

Louisiana — statewide referendum to limit terms on a long list ofboards and commissions.
YES: 1,129,711 (69%) TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 497,205 (31%)

Daytona Beach Shores, FL -- Measure to repeal 8-year term limits
YES: 36%
NO: 64% TERM LIMITS WIN!

North Miami, FL -- Eliminate term limits for mayor
YES: 5,280 (33%)
NO: 10,693 (67%) TERM LIMITS WIN!

Ventura County, CA -- limits county supervisors to 12 years in office
YES: 77% TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 23%

Lynwood, CA -- limits city council members to two terms in office
YES: 75% TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 25%

Pinole, CA -- limits city council members to three terms in office
YES: 73% TERM LIMITS WIN!
NO: 27%

Leadville, CO -- repeal of county commission term limits
YES: 30%
NO: 70% TERM LIMITS WIN!

Ferguson Township, PA -- repeal of two-term limit on township supervisors
YES: 38%
NO: 62% TERM LIMITS WIN! (only 7 of 8 precincts counted)

Florida sends 'citizen legislator' to Congress

2008-11-12T21:28:00.000-05:00

NOV. 4, 2008 -- After two consecutive reps left office disgraced, Florida’s Congressional District 16 is fed up with arrogance and scandal under both Republicans and Democrats. This seat, still referred to in political circles as “Mark Foley’s old seat,” has now been handed by voters to Rep. Tom Rooney.

The voters’ decision was contrary to that of most local media endorsements, which cited Rooney’s alleged lack of experience. This is a ludicrous assertion, as Rooney is a former U.S. Army JAG, a criminal prosecutor for the State of Florida and taught Constitutional and Criminal Law at West Point. Currently, he practices law in Stuart, Florida.

What they mean by “lack of experience” is that he never held any elected office. But Rooney sees this as a plus:

“While it is true the three candidates running in the GOP primary are similar on many issues, the quality I believe gives me the advantage is that I am the only non-politician, someone who will truly be a citizen-legislator who is ready to lead,” Rooney told the Stuart News. “I am the only candidate that favors term limits.”

In fact, term limits was a regular theme in his stump speeches, one of which I attended early in the campaign.

To the Town-Crier, another local publication, Rooney said: “I don’t subscribe to the philosophy that I’m going to do anything to get myself elected the next two years,” he said. “I’m not tempted by what special interests can offer you. I favor term limits.”

Congratulations, Tom!