Posted by
Andrews on Tuesday, September 30, 2008 2:54:13 PM
Recently, especially with Pelosi's nearly insane ranting, I have heard renewed calls for term limits. Many argue that most of our current problems come from having a professional political class, and that by allowing them to become professional politicians we have let them get out of touch with the common man, making term limits a necessity to maintain true representative government.
Now, I am of two minds about term limits. I understand the motivation of those who want to eliminate professional politicians, and I sympathize, but I want to point out some problems.
First, it throws out the good with the bad, and circumvents the will of the people. If there is a great representative, whose constituents love him, why should they be forced to find another representative who is less appealing to them just because of term limits. (And yes, I think the same about presidential term limits.) I know that the thought is that politicians over time become more out of touch with the common man, but that is not inevitable. And it ignores the other side of the coin, that over time a politician also gains experience which makes him more effective and better able to represent his constituents. Meaning that while we gain some benefits through term limits we lose others.
Second, and more importantly, the shorter the term limits, the less influential politicians become. When politicians are prevented from getting their bearings by short term limits, the bureaucracy gains in influence. Thus, rather than a congress dominated by long term congressman and bought by lobbyists, we will have a congress filled with amateurs, controlled by the bureaucracy which is bought by lobbyists. Rather than congressmen retiring into lobbying positions, we will see top bureaucrats becoming lobbyists. And, for anyone who thinks bureaucrats are better than congressmen, I would just point them to the state department and its rather seditious behavior whenever it disagrees with the president on foreign affairs.
The problem is not the long terms served by the congressmen, nor by how out of touch they are. The problem, simply put, is that congress has too much power. If we implement term limits, we will just be handing control of that power to the bureaucrats, or the judges, or some other group. When that much power is entrusted to government, someone will find a way to wield it to their advantage. We can try term limits, civil service regulations, judicial rules, and whatever other means we want, but someone will figure out a way to put that power into their hands. We can change who wields it, but we cannot prevent someone from wielding it.
Any solution will be nothing more than a cosmetic fix until we face the underlying problem, a government grown too powerful and intrusive. Until we finally decide to reclaim that power, to return it to states, localities, and the people themselves, no fix will make life any better. We may change the face of who oppresses us, but we will not end all our woes until we take back that grant of unlimited power.
And that, in a nutshell, is why I can't get excited about term limits.