Bob McNamara , Upham

There was a time I believed we had term limits. It was called voting someone out of office if they were not effective. However, money in politics made that a myth.

I’ve seen plenty opposed to the term limits measure and often the cry seems to be to not let out of state influencers impact your vote. I’ve yet to see anyone name those out of state influencers but I have seen the names of those who oppose the measure. They are the legislators who get to stay in Bismarck. They are the lobbyists who have built influence with the legislators who get to stay in Bismarck. They are the organizations who, although not registered as lobbyists, benefit from the relationship they have built with the legislators who get to stay in Bismarck, etc.

I’ve also read that the programs and budget are too big and complex to have inexperienced people in Bismarck. First, I would say that the belief that voters would elect people too stupid to handle the programs or budget is in reality a slap in the face of the electorate. Be that as it may what it also tells me is that maybe the legislators have created such complex state programs and budgets that there is a greater need for term limits. I have often told people who step into new positions where they oversaw others to be careful that they don’t allow them to become too indispensable. Bureaucratic people tend to make themselves indispensable and it sounds as if we may have some legislators who want you to believe they are indispensable.

I will say that if it is true that the programs and budget are that complex then maybe we need full time legislators. Maybe we need more than 80 days per session. Maybe we find sixteen years isn’t feasible. None of these issues should preclude a yes vote for term limits today. It will still be possible to address those issues at a later time by having an initiated measure. Sixteen years in Bismarck, between the two houses, should be plenty to have made your impact.