What is the problem with term limits?

By Curtis Harris

I am a fan of term limits on elected officials. Several state and local governments enacted term limits in the past twelve or so years, with good results. Visit U.S. Term Limits for details, including accounts of the antics of term-limited politicians. In the US Congress, there are no limits on terms, and there is no way short of a constitutional amendment to enact them. Therefore, I am an advocate of voting against any member of Congress who has served two terms in office.

When I talk with other people about my position on term limits, I am often confronted with the objection that automatic votes against an incumbent might allow the election of a person who is unfit to hold the office. I respond by asking for examples of unfit people who might get elected. The answers I get can be distilled into four categories. Some people suggest an idiot might get elected in place of the incumbent. Others worry about a thief getting elected. Liars are mentioned quite often. And, of course, immoral people are another concern. Let's look at these four cases to see the extent of the problem.

An idiot elected to Congress, in order to get along with other members of the same party, might vote for legislation because they are told to do so, without bothering to understand its purpose or possible unintended effects in later years. In another case, the idiot who gets elected might have an idealistic, fairytale worldview and become a pawn of members with cynical hidden agendas.

A thief elected to Congress would not be able to do much direct damage. Beyond their office budget and office furniture, there is little in the way of government assets to be carried off. The keys to Ft. Knox are not available. However, by trading influence and votes for campaign funds, perks, and goodies for state or district, this thief would have some indirect ability to steal.

A liar, if elected, might break promises made to voters during the campaign. Once in office, this liar would continue to lie. The first lies would be about the promises (of course, they were not really broken). Then the lies would become about the causes of America's problems, and the effects of proposals meant to resolve the problems.

An immoral person elected to the Congress would continue past behavior. There might be sexual improprieties and the need to cover them up. Personal, political, and professional associations with corrupt businesspeople, labor racketeers, and amoral special interest groups would continue or could begin.

All four cases would be a problem resulting from the voters' decision to vote against incumbents who have served two terms. The active citizenship that, in a few cases, allowed these unfit people to be elected would also correct the problem in the next election. They would be defeated. Given there would be few of these unfit people elected and that they would serve only one, or possibly two, terms, they could do little damage. After all, the majority of members of Congress, fit to hold office, would control the few unfit members.

So mistakes could be made. But voters with enough sense to get rid of long-term incumbents would surely correct the mistake in the next election. No one idiot, thief, liar, or immoral person could do much damage. The idiots, thieves, liars and degenerates would only become a problem if they were reelected over and over and over again.

© Curtis Harris