Among them, John Kitzhaber, the outgoing governor of Oregon (leaving because of
term limits), Cardinal John Henry Newman (dead more than a century), and the
Missouri House of Representatives (where something like 91 of 168 legislators are
new this term) have convinced me that, while term limits may be fine for the
executive branch of government, they're not a good idea for the legislative
branch.
The same theme showed up in an interview Kitzhaber did on
NPR, Newman's essay on the proper site for a university, and on a news story this
morning on the new MO legislature, and it's not the obvious one. Most arguments
I've seen against term limits in Congress point out that a legislator whose term
is limited has no time to build a power base, serve on important committees, and
bring that clout to serve his or her state. That's not my po in there; it's always
been obvious to me that if everyone has the same limits, that argument falls
apart. The argument that convinces me is the steep learning curve. There is a lot
to learn about serving in a legislature; there are people to deal with, processes
that are different for each legislative, and a lot of tribal knowledge that must
be assimilated. In my field, tribal knowledge is generally a bad thing; processes
need to be documented whenever possible. In a legislature, I suspect it's often
not possible. (Though it's ridiculous that Missouri staffers need to teach state
reps how to write and pass a bill, as much of that certainly ought to be written
down.)
At the moment, term limits are not working well, because
legislators kicked out of office can come back as lobbyists. That means lobbyists
may have the experience and clout to overwhelm and overpressure freshman
legislators.
It's true, though, that some new blood and new ideas
are needed in government. People shouldn't be able to serve forever, because it's
very difficult to remember why you're there, and whom you're there to serve, when
you deal only with other poltical critters for years. We do need to keep
remembering that one form of term limit that applies to all elected offices in the
US: the ballot. We certainly need to remove impediments to its use; keeping a good
legislator in place is one thing, but keeping him there because he's got so much
funding that all other voices are drowned out is another matter. Drastic reform of
election finance laws may be necessary so that new voices can be heard. New people
need to come in, just not all at once.
Gov. Kitzhaber remarked that
term limits may be valid for the executive branch of government. I think he's
right, at least for the top positions, presidents and governors. They need common
sense, but can build a staff to provide support on the details. And a time-limited
chief executive working with a legislature that's had time to build experience and
relationships may provide the checks and balances that were so important in all
those civics classes we've all forgotten from junior high school -- and that
actually are so important in safeguarding our civil rights.
PS: If
you haven't been keeping up with Doonesbury for the last week or so, go
href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=index2&cid=1060&pg=1">read it from
about 31 December on for some trenchant comments on Ashcroft's America.