Author: Redactor

Are term limits just a fad? Are they the hula-​hoop of the 90’s? That’s what some political pundits tell us.

Well, they should check their history books. Term limits are nearly as old as democracy itself. The ancient Greeks realized that even if elected democratically, elected officials could use their power to monopolize the office. Aristotle argued that term limits should be an essential part of any republic’s constitution. Cicero, the famous Roman statesmen, was a strong believer in term limits.

In America, term limits pre-​date the constitution. And in fact, no less than the author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, opposed ratifying our constitution until two problems were fixed. He wanted, first, a bill of rights, and second, rotation in office what we call term limits. Jefferson’s first concern was dealt with by The Bill of Rights, but Americans are still trying to find a way to place term limits on Congress.

Even when the law didn’t require rotation in office, American tradition has. President Washington stepped down after two terms. Until Franklin Roosevelt, other presidents followed that tradition. Now presidential term limits are part of the Constitution.

Term limits a fad? Well, it’s the law for the President, 38 governors, 18 state legislatures and thousands of local officials. Nothing against the hula-​hoop, but term limits will be around a lot longer.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The Empire is striking back. The American people voted and voted for term limits.

This decade 23 states placed limits on their congressional delegations. Eighteen states (40 percent of the population) now have limits on their state legislatures. Thousands of local officials across the country have mandated rotation in office. New York, LA, Denver, Cincinnati and Washington, D.C. have all enacted limits in the 90’s.

How do the Darth Vaders of the political class react to all this? There’s a lot of heavy breathing that’s for sure. If you didn’t support term limits before you might after learning about all the dirty tricks politicians have pulled against term limits. Term limits laws have been taken to court endlessly. In California, legislators twice sued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

But term limits prevailed.

In 1995, the Supreme Court did strike down the congressional term limits laws passed in 23 states. But citizen legislators in the Congress are fighting back by limiting their own terms. The political class has tried to thwart the voters at the local level, too. Political bosses in New York City slipped a confusing measure on the ballot to extend term limits to 12 years. Voters said no.

In city after city, politicians have used every trick in the book to try to fool voters into repealing them. Voters are sticking to their guns. Yes, the Empire is striking back. But term limits are working and coming soon to a town near you. May the force be with you.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

If you’re having brain surgery, wouldn’t you want an experienced doctor? If your basement is full of water, don’t you want an experienced plumber? If you’re on trial for your life, don’t you want an experienced lawyer? Sure.

But when it comes to those who represent us in Congress, most Americans do NOT want an experienced politician.

Is it because we don’t value experience? Not at all. It’s precisely because we do value experience real world experience.

What we need in Congress is not more politicians expert in writing a press release or talking out of both sides of their mouth. We need people who have experience in running a business, who have worked in health care or in our schools folks who know what it is to earn a living and raise a family because they’ve done it.

George McGovern spent 24 years in the U.S. Senate. When he left Congress, he started a small inn in Vermont. Unfortunately, the inn was not successful, but McGovern learned some things about business. McGovern said to the Wall Street Journal, “I wish that someone had told me about the problems of running a business. I have to pay taxes, meet a payroll I wish I had had a better sense of what it took to do that when I was in Washington.”

Not only do we want representatives who are fresh from the private sector; we want legislators who are planning to return to the private sector. We want them connected to our lives. And if any of these citizen legislators are good plumbers, I hope they’ll come back home soon my basement’s full of water again.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Salmon are fish so strong they can swim upstream. But when I think of Salmon, Congressman Matt Salmon of Arizona first comes to mind.

Rep. Salmon also swims against the current the career politician current of Washington. He’s limited himself to 6 years and is now in his final term. You’ve heard from professional politicians, but listen to what citizen legislator Matt Salmon recently said:

I’m leaving, believing more firmly in term limits than I ever did when I first got here, because I can’t count on my fingers and toes the numbers of times people have said, “Well, Matt, I know you look at so-​and-​so as kind of a squishy Congressman, somebody that really kind of vacillates on the issues, but boy you should have known him back when he first got here. Boy, he was the Rock of Gibraltar, he was firm.“I ask them, why did you cast such-​and-​such a vote, that just doesn’t seem to be in line with your philosophy … “well, the Speaker promised that he would come and do a fund-​raiser for me, or well, if I cast this vote, then I’ll get this plumb committee spot, then I can raise more money so I can keep coming back here with this wonderful job.” The fact is people do cast their votes based on their political longevity. That’s just the way it is, and that’s the way it will always be until you have a group of people that are more interested in doing what they came to do, and changing the direction of this country than they are in looking out for their own career.

That’s Matt Salmon. Don’t you wish your representative thought like that?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Remember the old commercial slogan that said to women, “You’ve come a long way baby”?

This century women gained the right to vote, but today women in politics seem to be hitting a glass ceiling. Women remain woefully under-​represented. In Congress, they are only 9 percent of the Senate and a mere 12 percent of the House. But that doesn’t fully explain the problem.

When it comes to leadership positions, women are completely shut out of the top posts in both chambers. And not a single woman chairs a committee where the real power is. That’s not progress. Why aren’t women making more progress? Incumbents have all the advantages and few sensible people can be convinced to quit their jobs to take on these powerful incumbents.

Most incumbents are, of course, men. A study by the National Women’s Political Caucus concluded: “Winning elections has nothing to do with the sex of the candidate, and everything to do with incumbency.” With term limits in effect for state legislatures, both Maine and Oregon have elected their first woman speaker. Women are also gaining other leadership positions.

But our national legislature, the Congress, has been monopolized by incumbents. Monopolies in the private sector, that denied women a fair chance, wouldn’t be tolerated. Why then are so many powerful folks in Washington, including the leaders of women’s groups, tolerating a political “good ole boy” network?

Women have come a long way, but with term limits they can go even further.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

No one could hate term limits worst than the politicians right? Well, that’s what I thought, too. But I was wrong.

A survey by the Council of State Governments shows lobbyists oppose term limits even more than do politicians. While 76 percent of politicians were against term limits, among lobbyists a whopping 86 percent were opposed. Of course, 75 percent of regular Americans are in favor.

Why do lobbyists hate term limits? Lobbyists know that their power and influence comes from developing long-​term relationships with incumbents, especially with those in leadership. Under term limits, not only do lobbyists lose these long relationships, but also leadership and committee chairmen no longer have the unilateral control they used to wield. Term limits equalize power within the legislature, and thus lobbyists can no longer ramrod legislation through on the basis of their relationship with one powerful member. Instead, they have to make their case on the merits and to all the representatives.

Reader’s Digest reported: “In term-​limited legislatures, lobbyists can’t play their game by the old rules .… In one state capitol after another where term limits have been enacted, lawmakers express a wariness bordering on hostility toward those who seek to influence their votes.”

One Michigan lobbyists complained, “Gone are the days when you belly up to the bar and ask someone for their vote on a bill.” That’s why it’s such a hoot when opponents of term limits pretend lobbyists will gain power.

With a vampire, you have to drive a stake through its heart. With lobbyists, just mention term limits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

They say no one’s life, liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session.

Well in Arkansas it’s safe now; the legislature has adjourned. But even while they were in session, this year was a whole lot safer than in the past. That’s because the Arkansas Legislature has changed. Like 17 other states, covering 40 percent of the U.S. population, Arkansas has term limits. This year, 57 out of 100 representatives were new.

Before the session began, the political pundits acted like Chicken Little telling us the sky would fall. We couldn’t survive without the 800 years of legislative experience that had to leave due to term limits, they warned us. Well, under term limits the legislature did more than survive it blossomed. Rep. Bobby Glover, who had served in the legislature many years ago and returned this session, said: “Before the session, there was a big question of how effective this session was going to be. I couldn’t have been impressed more. I’ve never seen a group that was more conscientious in scrutinizing legislation.”

Rep. Ted Thomas, a veteran legislator, said the freshmen “wanted to know what the facts were, not who the personalities were.” Term limits leader Skip Cook wasn’t surprised. “It seems to me what’s taken place here is the same thing that has happened in California and elsewhere,” he said. “It’s proven to be that average citizens can give up their job, go to [the Capitol], make democracy work and go home again.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

On issues, politicians love to tell us how much they care, but they hate to tell us where they stand.

Last year, Pat Toomey from Pennsylvania ran a different kind of campaign. No poll-​driven, mushy sound bites. He didn’t tell voters what they wanted to hear, but what he really believed. Toomey did something far too rare these days; on issue after issue, he took a stand. Toomey campaigned for a 17-​percent flat tax, elimination of the IRS, and partial privatization of Social Security. He pledged to term-​limit himself to 3 terms in Congress. In the primary, he defeated 5 other candidates including a powerful incumbent state senator. Then he went on to win a hard-​fought general election.

About his victory, Toomey said: “As rough and tumble as this political process can be, it is encouraging to see that the voters are way ahead of the politicians, pundits, the consultants and the spin doctors.” Toomey went on, “From the beginning, the campaign professionals told me not to be specific in this campaign. Don’t talk about issues, they said. Don’t talk about that flat tax; don’t talk about real reform in Social Security; don’t talk about term limits, because they are all way too controversial. Well, folks, we have proven all the pundits wrong.”

Toomey has a point. Those who want to spend a long career in Congress are terrified of ruffling the feathers of any special interest group. But candidates who go to Congress to accomplish things for the country cannot ignore issues. To them, issues come first. You may not always agree with these term-​limited citizen legislators, but thank goodness they take a stand.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Want to know how Washington works?

Anne Eppard is a Washington lobbyist. Last year she earned $1.5 million. That’s a lot of money! But what’s truly amazing is that her lobbying fees kept coming in even after she was indicted on seven felony counts alleging among other things that she took $230,000 in payoffs to steer government contracts to special interests.

“Eppard’s experience since her indictment,” writes The Washington Post , “provides a pointed illustration of the realpolitik of the Washington lobbying world: What matters most to clients is not who you are, but who you know, and your ability to get results.”

You see Anne Eppard is a very close friend of Congressman Bud Schuster, the powerful chairman of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. You’ll remember that Schuster is a leading pork-​barreler whose committee was caught offering members of Congress an extra $25 million of wasteful spending in their districts in exchange for their votes on last year’s transportation bill.

Relationships like Eppard’s and Schuster’s, which compromise our government and waste our precious tax dollars, don’t spring up overnight. This one has developed over the 25 years while she worked as a staffer for Schuster. Nor do most congressmen go to Congress believing that the federal government is their personal plaything.

But sometimes, especially after almost 30 years in office, that arrogant attitude takes over. So this is how Washington works with the sweetheart deals between lobbyists and career politicians. But of course, that means Washington doesn’t work.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

When it comes to war, the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare it and makes the President the commander-​in-​chief to wage the war. Of course, the Constitution has long been ignored in this area and congressional power handed over to the executive branch.

When the United States fought in Korea and Vietnam tens of thousands of American boys gave their lives without Congress ever taking political responsibility by declaring war. It seems strange that while Congress began to fill with career politicians, they were willing to trade away their congressional power to avoid responsibility.

Congress, the branch of government our Founders gave the power over issues of war, has become silent on foreign policy. One Capitol Hill newspaper asked the question: “Should Congress have a voice on Kosovo?” One response came from columnist Robert Novak, who said:

“We have lost the Constitution’s clear mandate that only the Congress has the power ‘to declare war.’ Declarations of war long ago became passe , and now a president dispatches remote-​control weapons without congressional approval. Such awesome power is magnified when the United States is the last superpower accountable to nobody in the world. This cries out for input by Congress. The president cannot make minor changes in Medicare or farm supports without congressional approval but can wage wars around the world on his own. That is hardly what the Founding Fathers envisioned.”

The Founders envisioned a Congress of citizen statesmen, not one of career politicians afraid of their constitutional responsibility.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.