An Approach To Politics & Partisanship
Over and over, political activists are tackling the problem of long-term incumbents. Once someone has been elected– or worse, re-elected– they become difficult to unseat. Political observers contend that this situation leads to less effective government, and a little too much coziness between elected officials and their big donors and lobbyists.
Many state governments have therefore instituted laws that limit the length of time an official may serve. Efforts at implementing these controls in D.C., however, have uniformly failed, with the exception of the Commander-In-Chief; he/she is limited to two terms.
Some of the pundits are very concerned about this movement. The conservative thinker Burke argued that politics is a skill like any other. Just as you would not want an inexperienced surgeon operating on you or your family, so you would not want a novice elected official deciding on far-reaching laws and policy. Every newly elected official will say that the job is far more complicated than they imagine, and that most of the first first term is consumed by simply ‘learning the ropes’. Real mastery of the process can take a decade or more.
Louisiana is one of the states to have chosen to limit the years that elected officials may serve. This has caused a re-shuffling of anyone and everyone with long-term experience, and a lot of our hardest working representatives have lost elections, or have simply chosen to leave public service. So it appears that the only real experience left among the elected personnel, may be the UN-elected personnel, the bureaucrats and the hired representatives of special interest groups. Not exactly an improvement, that.
But there is another problem facing our government today: increasingly acrimonious partisanship. We have reached a point where trying to win the game has become more important than the game itself; victory for one party or the other is more important than being American. We are so busy trying to win skirmishes over our differences, we ignore the overwhelming number of issues where most of us agree.
Let me offer an idea that could address both problems: Extensible Limits. After the normal time of limited service, a candidate might be allowed to run again– IF the body in which he/she has served concurs, (by private vote of course). Each re-election would become increasingly difficult; the first Extension might require a 50% vote, the next, an additional 3%, and a required 3% increase for each successive re-election.
For the chief officer, perhaps the House and the Senate would both have to grant permission.
This has some very positive outcomes. Backbiting is punished, cooperation is rewarded. Politicians have to decide if they want to play hardball and settle for a few quick wins and then leave; or if they wish to really work at governance, at collaboration, and at consensus-building. I suspect the best and the brightest will choose the latter.
The deadwood, the dirtballs, will find themselves limited to a very few terms. They will exert very little influence on the system, and quickly leave.
The very best people we produce will rise, and serve as an example to all who follow. Those with skill, and vision, and a passion for democracy, will quickly grow in stature and respect. And the length of time they serve will be in direct correlation to their talents.