Category: term limits

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall term limits

Taking the Initiative (and Referendum)

Maryland State Senator Joan Carter Conway dislikes a certain popular bill, so it probably won’t pass. Why not? Is she so charismatic that she can persuade most fellow lawmakers to vote down any bill she dislikes?

No. Conway chairs the Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee. Although most committee members support this particular bill, she can kill it just by declining to bring it up for a vote. Then it won’t matter what anybody else thinks — in the committee, the senate, or the whole state.

The bill in question would simply allow direct shipment of wine to Maryland. That’s it. Prohibition was repealed some time ago. But there are still many silly laws regulating how liquor may be distributed and sold, laws that have nothing to do with protecting the public.

Annapolis commentator Eric Hartley argues for legislative term limits, saying it would help break up Maryland’s undemocratic committee system. Yes, but voters need the right of citizen initiative even more — so they can GET the term limits, for one thing.

Maryland citizens do have referendum rights, the right to exercise the “People’s Veto.” But lawmakers have been making it very difficult lately to exercise that veto. Let’s hope the courts strike down those restrictions. And that voters find a way to pass liberty-​expanding ballot measures on their own even when their representatives won’t or can’t.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption term limits

Bye Bye Bayh

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana is calling it quits, leaving the Congress after two terms. What’s not to like?

Without mandatory term limits for the office, Mr. Bayh’s self-​imposed limit seems an honorable second-best.

Bayh has also openly expressed his disgust with the behavior of this Congress, calling it “brain dead.” No argument from me.

On CBS’s Early Show Bayh clarified his decision to leave government for the private sector, saying, “If I could create one job in the private sector by helping to grow a business, that would be one more than Congress has created in the last six months.”

Ouch!

If he’s talking about sustainable, productive jobs, he’s no doubt correct.

But there is something about Evan Bayh’s leave-​taking announcement that leaves me more than a little disgusted.

Bayh’s decision surprised most. But it was certainly no surprise to Bayh. Surely contemplating re-​election has been on his mind for some time.

By waiting until to the last minute to drop out, Bayh ensures that the people of Indiana will have no say in choosing the Democratic candidate for his position — no campaign, no primary election. The Democrat’s nominee will be installed by the party’s State Central Committee.

Bayh’s departure is unfortunately no departure from the brand of politics that continually games our elections, where the insiders offer voters as little choice as possible.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits

Senator DeMint for Term Limits

Yes, we can term-​limit the Congress. 

I’m not saying it will be easy. It won’t be easy. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.

That’s why I applaud U.S. Senator Jim DeMint for introducing a constitutional amendment to term limit Congress. Three two-​year terms maximum for House members, two six-​year terms for senators. Says DeMint, “term limits are not enough, of course.… 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.”

DeMint knows that most congressmen are not eager to restrict their own power. But he’s not giving up.

Should he? In his Best of the Web e‑letter, James Taranto asks whether DeMint’s proposed amendment will “include a provision stipulating that any senator who reaches the limit automatically becomes president? Because that’s the only way that two thirds of them would ever vote for it.”

Maybe, James. It is easy to be negative about the prospects for implementing major political reforms. One will be right most of the time. But I say it’s better to be an optimistic warrior pushing for the hard-​to-​accomplish but important-​to-​accomplish reform. Someday we’ll find the tipping point; someday we’ll see our “representatives” realize they have no choice but to accept term limits.

DeMint’s amendment moves us closer to that day.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits

When Your Bond Is Your Bond

Remember the Alliance for Bonded Term Limits?

I talked about the group last summer, when ABTL was little more than an idea. They were looking for candidates who would not only vow to limit their terms in office, but also agree to forfeit a big chunk of their assets if they break their word.

Sounds like a good idea — some vote-​getters are quite skilled at sounding honest and sincere and rock-​solid about principles they couldn’t care less about. Let them put their money where their mouths are if they’re truly serious about limiting their tenure in office.

And now someone has done just that: Will Breazeale, a North Carolina Republican. He’s seeking votes in next year’s election, hoping to represent the state’s seventh congressional district. In October, Mr. Breazeale formally executed a bond for $250,000 in a ceremony before the Board of Elections Office in New Hanover. If he tries to serve more than three consecutive terms, the money goes to charity.

At his website, Breazeale tells voters, “When I say that I will only serve three terms as your Congressman, I mean it; and I hope this promissory note will make my intentions clear.” 

Breazeale is the first candidate in the country to commit himself to limiting his own terms in office with a bonded pledge. Let us hope he’s the first of many.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers term limits

Dollars and Change

Big spending by candidates doesn’t always win elections. For instance, New Jersey Governor — soon to be ex-​Governor — Jon Corzine outspent his opponent, Chris Christie, more than three to one … and still lost.

Of course, spending more money usually works better than spending less.

Michael Bloomberg won his race for mayor of New York City. But barely. Bloomberg spent 16 times more than his challenger — over $100 million dollars to get just 50 percent. It cost him more than $150 for every vote. Ouch.

So, why did the mayor have to spend so much to eke out a win?  Two words: term limits.

Bloomberg’s deal with the council to gut the city’s two-​term limit and allow them all to run for a third term didn’t cost him his powerful perch. But it did cost him millions of dollars. And his reputation.

There were also a number of initiatives on the ballot. Before Tuesday’s election, at Townhall​.com, I highlighted Maine and Washington State measures to put a cap on state spending growth. Both measures were defeated, but it was educational to take note of the spending.

In the final months, Maine’s measure was outspent by about ten to one. Washington’s? $3.5 million to nothing. Predictably, the big money came  from groups already wealthy from standing in the receiving line for government spending.

Spending money to make money … spending money to take money.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits

The Revenge of the Mantra

“We have term limits; they’re called elections.” That’s the beloved mantra of term limits’ opponents.

For all their professed love of elections, though, these politicians don’t care much for the elections in which voters have enacted term limits. They regularly try any and every trick in the book to overturn such votes — anything to stay longer in office.

Take New York City. Voters passed term limits in one election; years later they smashed a term-​limit weakening measure put on the ballot by the city council. But then Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the city council found a legal loophole, allowing themselves an extra term.

And they refused to permit the people any vote on their power grab.

But just weeks ago there was an election. Seventeen council members who had voted to weaken their own term limits faced primary opponents. Three were defeated. Two more are in races too close to call — with re-​counts now underway. Another six won in very, very close contests. 

The New York Times called the results “the greatest repudiation of incumbents in a generation.”

According to David Birdsell, dean of Baruch College’s School of Public Affairs, “Public frustration with what seems to be self-​serving government officials is at a fever pitch right now.”

Call it “the revenge of the mantra”: Take away term limits, and voters will take away future terms the old-​fashioned way … with elections.

This is … wonderful! This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.