Editorial

Extending limit to three terms a good idea

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

It's not as good as an outright repeal of term limits, but Sen. Tom Carlson's proposed constitutional amendment to limit lawmakers to three back-to-back terms is a step in the right direction.

Nebraska voters approved term limits of two consecutive terms in 2000, which went into effect in 2006. Senators can run again if they sit out one term.

We've always felt it is a mistake to limit capable, knowledgeable lawmakers to two terms, barring legislators from serving just as they have gained enough experience and created the networks necessary to be effective.

We already had term limits -- voters could turn away any lawmaker they don't like at election time. We suspect most people who favor term limits do so because they want to limit the terms of officials elected from other legislative districts, not their own.

Fifteen states have some sort of term limits, and six have repealed them. Six states have lifetime bans after the terms are served, but only Nebraska has a unicameral legislature, preventing term-limited lawmakers from running for the Senate after serving in the House and vice-versa.

Term limit proponents contend that enacting the limits leaves seats open for more participants, and perhaps it does. But when they are forced to leave, seasoned lawmakers take with them the institutional memory that otherwise would keep the legislative body from fighting the same battles over and over, and making "rookie" mistakes that take years to correct.

That institutional memory, and the power it creates, shifts to unelected bureacrats.

Extending the limit to three terms should help keep the power in the hands of voters, where it belongs.

Comments
View 2 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Guess the gazette don't care about what the majority of people have already VOTED on. I remember a senator that did that, what was his name?

    -- Posted by remington81 on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 2:29 PM
  • Your sixth paragraph is an excellent example of why, IMO, term-limits was voted into place.

    You call those at end of term 'seasoned,' but the voters saw them as 'career,' especially after two or three 'seasons.' 'Institutional memory,' as I see it, is also an excellent example of what many called 'ability to hide things in legislation.'

    In a country "Of the People, By the People, and For the People," 'rookie mistakes' are easier to find and fix, over professional word-games that takes the 'people' out of the picture of understanding; and imperfect representatives might tend to keep things simple. It is better to have a problem that takes years to correct, than a problem that takes years to find, and there is no way of fixing/correcting.

    I wonder how long our Senators stayed in office, when Nebraska first got started, and when did the tendency to make a career out of governing became vogue?? I have no idea, so I guess I'm barking up a tree, hoping there is a bit of coon-logic up there somewhere. Ha. Nuff-said.

    -- Posted by Navyblue on Wed, Feb 1, 2012, at 3:03 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: