Against Term Limits –
Some argue that voters have the option of limiting an elected official’s term in office with each vote they cast.
They believe that with term limits, the unelected bureaucrats would simply wait until a particular elected official’s term expires and pursue their agenda at a later date when a more favorable environment exists.
They see term limits as a Constitutional issue, and believe any attempt to pass a Constitutional Amendment limiting terms in office would be an exercise in futility since it would require support by the politicians whose terms it would limit.
For Term Limits –
Others believe a system of incumbent protectionism has evolved to the point where the scales are tipped grossly in favor of incumbents. They believe the only practical way to minimize political corruption is to limit the amount of time each elected official is allowed to stay in office.
They believe the only way to start chipping away at the bureaucratic system that has been severely impeded – even corrupted by government employee union personnel is to elect term limited office holders who can make the difficult decisions because they have nothing to lose since they are not concerned with re-election. They will have nothing to lose by breaking the union’s strangle hold on government, and by getting rid of the bureaucrats who stand in the way of real reform.
The term limit supporters see elected officials making the right decisions because office holders know they will soon be returning to the same private sector they helped regulate.
Where do you stand on the term limits issue?
Tell us why you are for, or against term limits at all levels of government.