Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.comment From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: Congressional term limits...and limitations Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 17:26:45 EST Message-ID: \SE B;COMMENTARY \SS (WS) \HD Congressional term limits...and limitations \BY Victor Kamber Term limits are unnecessary. When voters are fed up with incumbents, they don't hesitate to vote them out of office, as George Bush and Dan Quayle can personally testify. This year's election also produced 110 new faces in Congress, more than one-fourth of its entire membership - all without term limits artificially forcing incumbents to step down. That's overwhelming evidence that democracy works; that voters already have the only tool they need to fire incumbents - the vote! Term limits would deprive us of experienced officials who know how to make good policy. Would the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 have passed without the support of Sen. Everett Dirksen, Illinois Republican? Would the nation have been guided so ably through the trauma of Watergate without Sen. Sam Ervin, North Carolina Democrat, and Rep. Peter Rodino, New Jersey Democrat? Would senior citizens have the protections they receive now without Rep. Claude Pepper, Florida Democrat? The list is endless. Under term limits, we would pay a tangible price for denying ourselves the best and most seasoned talent our nation has to offer. Term limitations will force neophytes into leadership positions and committee chairmanships. It is hard to envision any two-term representative chairing the House Ways and Means Committee and navigating safely through the minefields of tax policy. It is impossible to imagine a whip with four years of experience enforcing any semblance of party discipline, leading to even more legislative gridlock. It makes no more sense to have novices run Congress than to surrender control of our schools, banks, military and great corporations to teacher-trainess, tellers, drill sergeants and clerks. Term limits would severely damage any state's political and economic clout. If the courts approve, citizens of the 14 term-limited states will find their congressional delegations stripped of seniority and clout. This is a sure-fire way to lose their fair share of federal dollars and resources. Term limits would increase special interest power. With Congress and state legislatures comprised exclusively of novices, special interest lobbyists with decades of experience - many of them former senators and representatives - would run rings around neophyte legislators. Government would become a special interest candy store. Only campaign finance reform, not term limits, will guarantee competitive elections. If incumbents really do have a prohibitive advantage in campaigns - and this year the evidence contradicted that theory - then only spending limits, restrictions on franking and other perquisites, and public financing will level the playing field. Term limitations will produce a Congress and state legislatures of neophytes, making policy that is erratic at best and written by the special interests at worst. Voters will have fewer choices, and many of Congress' best and brightest will be forced to leave just as they are hitting their stride. Americans may have to learn the hard way that snake oil looks appetizing but tastes rancid. Victor Kamber is president of The Kamber Group, a communications consulting and public relations firm, hired by several members of Congress to fight term-limitation referenda. This article written for Scripps Howard News Service. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM