The Case for Term Limits – Damage Control

New York Congressman Charlie Rangel

In the past couple of weeks we’ve learned a lot about Congressman Charlie Rangel.  His official salary isn’t even $200,000 per year and he has millions of dollars in assets kept hidden for years from the IRS.  Let us remind you that he’s been in office since 1971.

And he’s not the only one.  James Traficant was convicted and sent to prison for accepting bribes, false tax returns, racketeering and other things.  This conviction got him kicked out of the House of Representatives.  Harry Reid has had some very suspicious real estate transactions.  Barbara Boxer’s husband’s firm has been the beneficiary of her legislative actions.  William Jefferson was convicted on 11 counts related to abuse of his office.  Let’s not forget Ted Stevens or Duke Cunningham.  The list is long.

The point is that virtually every member of the Senate or House who has ethics “issues” (to put it lightly) has served for many terms.  They are career politicians.  Some have been in some form of public office for most of their adult life.

Term limits are our best defense against career politicians using their office for personal gain.  If they start to use their office for personal gain, that gain will be limited to the time served in office.  It takes some time to learn the system and how to game it to your benefit.  If you’re only there for a term or two, there’s less ability to game it.

We also have the benefit that campaign financing will be more transparent.  Candidates will be less likely to sponsor tit-for-tat legislation.  If reelection isn’t an option, then raising money won’t be an effect way of buying a vote once in office.

For the vast majority of the honest candidates, this won’t make a difference.  But there are, and have been, and will always be, a few really rotten apples.  Let’s use term limits, meaning we do not reelect them, to keep one bad apple from spoiling the whole bushel.

It’s time for term limits.  Do not reelect anyone.