Congress term limits imeme5/26/2023 Term limiting all members of the legislative branch, then, is viewed by most experts as a draconian, ill-advised measure that will severely hamper the legislature’s capacity. While some lawmakers have an effective chokehold on their seats, none has the comparable unilateral authority of a governor. For state and federal legislators, this is less of a concern. Term limits guarantee no single individual can concentrate those authorities to indefinitely retain their position. And it’s also why 36 states have adopted some form of gubernatorial term limits. It’s why the 22 nd Amendment was ratified in 1951 following FDR’s four consecutive elections. This is why George Washington felt it important to establish the two-term tradition for presidents in 1796 despite the Framers’ explicit rejection of term-limits for presidents (and members of Congress for that matter). And a governor and his or her lieutenant are the heads of their respective state agencies, boss to thousands, and face little bureaucratic opposition to their directives.Īs a consequence, the power of certain offices can be as impactful as it can be intoxicating. An AG’s choice to prosecute a case, for example, isn’t dependent on building a coalition the way a state lawmaker must for a bill. The individuals in these positions can make autonomous decisions with far-reaching effects without the requirement of a majority. State-wide offices, on the other hand, generally provide much more concentrated powers to their occupants. Without broad agreement, single members struggle to do much in a legislature. Term limiting officials with unilateral powers, particularly governors, is much different than placing tenure limits on members of an assembly. The state’s Assembly and Senate, as well as voters via a referendum, would all need to agree to the measure in order to be added to the state’s constitution. Hochul’s term limit proposal is different she wants to propose an amendment to the New York state constitution that would limit state-wide officers-governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and comptroller-to two terms in office. And they have been found to cause what scholars call a ‘ Burkean shift,’ where members care less about the interests of their constituents and more about their own personally held beliefs when they know their electoral fates aren’t dependent on the voters any longer they defer more to their personal stances.īut, to be fair, most of the analysis on term limit effects focus on state legislators. They have done little to minimize the time spent on fundraising or other electoral activities or slow the revolving door between the private and public sectors. Instead, term limits have been found to empower actors outside the chambers, including lobbyists, agency bureaucrats, and long-serving staffers. States with term limits haven’t led to a more diverse, representative cadre of lawmakers they haven’t incentivized legislators to spend more time seeking bipartisan policies or more efficient responses to constituent’s requests they haven’t borne politicians less dependent on lobbyists or special interests nor have they produced members who are more in-tune with their constituents’ policy wishes or more willing to give up politics once their time in office is up. In fact, as study after study, expert after expert, has warned, the implementation of term limits in numerous state legislatures has only exacerbated many of the problems their adoption aimed to solve. Why the frustration? Term limits-despite their broad appeal to a politically dejected public-simply don’t provide the benefits advocates promise.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |