An Associated Press news analysis today notes the problems new legislators have in dealing with the state's complex budget. There are no longer veteran lawmakers to deal with the budget since Missourians saw fit to vote in term limits.
I wrote several columns at the Lamar Democrat and the Carthage Press warning about the dangers of term limits. While I understand voters' feelings that some politicians get to Jefferson City and forget about the people back home, I still trust the people to make the decision on who they want to represent them.
By ensuring that the legislature is always in the hands of neophytes, we have increased the stranglehold lobbyists, bureaucrats, and special interests have on our state government.
5 comments:
I agree. Extending terms to perhaps 6 total would be prudent. That would on the surface hold off career politicos, while allowing for institutional memory on the budget and other procedural items to re-gain a firm foothold. As noted, bureaucrats and lobby interests have no "terms" and are always operating. Knowledge is power, so who do we want to have the most power, self interests or us?
I dont think career politicians are any more fiscally responsible then any newbie would be.
Career politicians pushing their own agendas and messing with public funds are the very reason we got the terms limited in the first place. You want someone who knows his way around the budget, then elect an accountant.
I believe that term limits are a mistake. The voters should be able to decide who they wish to represent them in the General Assembly. If someone is doing a good job, he or she should have the opportunity to continue. The representatives and senators should be chosen by the voters, and the voters should be the ones to control the tenure of their representatives in the General Assembly.
To have a fiscally responsible representative is certainly desirable and most charged with administering public funds are. Career politicians, do push agendas, a majority of which are set by, for and with public imput.Is there any reason for a person lobbying the legislature, whose narrow scope of interest and income centers on advancing his one group above another group , to advance an charitable hand to the newbie legislator, and point for him/her the way to equatible administration of the office or the budget? There are no term limits for area city council members. These persons administer and spend millions,decide wheather or not your pet should have a leash or how property is to be zoned for use. Much of their career is governed by tradition-- institutional memory. It keeps newbies from posing leash laws for cats, and voting for liquor stores near schools. In area cities, if you have a problem you call your councilman. Or you talk to them at the store. Interaction, listening to people is the mainstay of government at any level. Limiting choice is a counter productive idea.If limiting the public's choice in any aspect was in fact productive and a desirable end how does one explain the new hospital proposed for Joplin, which already has two hospitals?, the steady stream of new physicians setting up shop in the Joplin area? Or the tanning shops, beauty shops, cell phone outlets and video stores on every cornor in every town in SWMO? Its all about choices not limits..
Post a Comment