Longer term limits. Good or bad?
QuoteLad Daniels said it wasn't until the end of his first four-year term on the Jacksonville City Council that he finally hit his stride.
By then, though, he was on his way out, because council members are allowed to serve just two terms.
"I would have been far more effective had I been able to be there longer," said Daniels, president of the First Coast Manufacturers Association.
To help build on-the-job experience, Daniels and others support a change that would allow council members to serve up to 12 years, instead of the current eight-year limit.
Such a move, they say, must be approved by voters, who overwhelmingly supported a referendum setting term limits in 1991.
The issue came before the Charter Review Commission on Thursday, with several speakers telling a committee that term limits have resulted in an election cycle turnover problem on the City Council. Critics say every four years the council is stocked with rookies, fostering over-reliance on City Hall staff members.
Committee member Jim Catlett, a longtime lobbyist, said something has to be done to allow council terms to be more staggered - either by extending the term limit or holding elections more frequently than every four years.
Full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-11-15/story/daniels_calls_for_change_to_jacksonville_council_term_limits
bad idea.
All politicians should be limited.
Public Service is just that, service. Not a career.
I say cut the term limits in half, and toss them all out every 4 years, including the Mayor.
Quote from: Dan B on November 15, 2009, 01:54:44 PM
I say cut the term limits in half, and toss them all out every 4 years, including the Mayor.
That's a terrible idea...part of the reason the Florida House is so screwed up right now is that 80+ members have less than 2 years experience.
Term limits in general are stupid....remember that we always have the right to vote politicians out of office.
I was actually being contrary for the sake of humor.
While I agree, the voter should decide, it can be argued, the voter already DID decide.
Quote from: jandar on November 15, 2009, 01:53:15 PM
bad idea.
All politicians should be limited.
Public Service is just that, service. Not a career.
Great Quote You are Right on the Money! (All politicians should be limited.
Public Service is just that, service. Not a career.) I'm going to put this as a bumper sticker. Thank You ;)
Well if it has become so complex that a longer term is needed to figure out how things work then the process needs to be streamlined! Remove the double speak, lawyer terminology and maybe even go so far as to use plain language? I watch what happens on CNBC when Congress is getting ready pass something and some Professional Politician starts waving the new and improved Bill around .......it's only 1900 Pages long and I wonder just why! By my standards, current terms are too long! They should be 2 years in length and that includes the Mayor......if they can not do the job then we don't have to suffer through 4 years of ineptitude we get rid of them after 2! Leave the 8 year total limit in place which would limit them to 4 terms.........same amount of time but stagger all of the Council terms so no more than 6 are running every year. Our Founding Fathers had things set up for citizens to be represented by citizens and we seem to have gotten away from that............it just might be time to return to that concept!
term limits = good thing
Congress needs them, every 4 years like the prezy imo
Having served on boards and with various entities, I can tell you that institutional knowledge is gold within reason. Government is a mutli-billion dollar enterprise that in some ways is more complex than the corporate world due to the politics and many constituencies vying for attention. To know all the players, games, and factual details is an immense undertaking. Twelve years is not unreasonable to gather such knowledge. Not sure what the max should be, but twenty years would not be unreasonable.
What is a bigger problem to me is that the electorate does such a poor job of voting out the weak players. It shouldn't be a popularity contest but rather a best qualified contest. Instead of focusing on term limits, we should be focusing on better ways to educate the public on who they are voting for and getting the best people to run. Not relying on glossy mailings, soundbites, and slick 30 second TV ads supported by money from special interests.
Quote from: stjr on December 02, 2009, 05:47:40 PM
Having served on boards and with various entities, I can tell you that institutional knowledge is gold within reason. Government is a mutli-billion dollar enterprise that in some ways is more complex than the corporate world due to the politics and many constituencies vying for attention. To know all the players, games, and factual details is an immense undertaking. Twelve years is not unreasonable to gather such knowledge. Not sure what the max should be, but twenty years would not be unreasonable.
What is a bigger problem to me is that the electorate does such a poor job of voting out the weak players. It shouldn't be a popularity contest but rather a best qualified contest. Instead of focusing on term limits, we should be focusing on better ways to educate the public on who they are voting for and getting the best people to run. Not relying on glossy mailings, soundbites, and slick 30 second TV ads supported by money from special interests.
BRAVO !! Very well said. Term limits are a mindless knee-jerk reaction. Just think if everyone had to change jobs every two years or four years. Would business be more productive and efficent?
Just off the top of my head, I can list several great mayors of great cities that have been in office longer than 8 years. These are the same cities this website uses as examples that Jax should be following.
Charlotte - Pat McCrory: 14 years
Harrisburg PA - Stephen Reed: 34 years
Charleston Sc - Joe Riley: 34 years
Greenville SC - Knox White: 14 years
Pittsburgh PA - Tom Murphy 12 years (94-06)
Chicago - Rich Daley: 20 years
Soon you can add this one to the list:
New York - Michael Bloomberg: just elected to 3rd term
Only an exceptional person will learn the mayor's job and make a noticeable and lasting impact in less than five years. The second term they usually hit their stride, and then they are out the door. Then the process starts all over. Even Peyton has been better in his second term than his first, (albeit that bar was set really low).
stjr ......I gotta disagree big guy! With some of the present Council Members ....one year would be too much, but I can only vote for my representative (John Meserve.......I did not vote for him last time nor will I the next! I meet him one time and that was enough to form my opinion.....he does not represent me or the rest of his constituents!) I don't really give a rats a** what a person's political affiliation is.....I watch to see if they represent the people who put them into office! Voting record means alot and so do voiced statements but some simple research will show much as to just wether or not they truly represent their voters. That to me means more than anything else. Term limits are too long now by what I have seen and the prospect of having someone like "The Boy Blunder" heading up the other incompetents just makes me shudder to no end! Term limits should not be extended.....but maybe some sort of primary school or education regarding being a Council Member beyond the Ethics that Ms Carla teaches the newbies?
Quote from: Sportmotor on December 02, 2009, 04:54:39 PM
term limits = good thing
Congress needs them, every 4 years like the prezy imo
What about the supreme court and its "until you die" term limit?
CS Foltz, what makes you think changing officeholders every two years will result in better government? Why don't YOU run against this Meserve guy? What has he done tthat is so bad?
Quote from: Reaper man on December 03, 2009, 05:16:18 AM
Quote from: Sportmotor on December 02, 2009, 04:54:39 PM
term limits = good thing
Congress needs them, every 4 years like the prezy imo
What about the supreme court and its "until you die" term limit?
Them too
For once, I agree with stjr, and I'm not surprised I agree with vic. We need to elect better people and remove the popularity contest/ buy your position aspects from our GOB network of government. If we had better leaders, I would be in support of longer terms for elected officials. The list presented by Vic includes some of my favorite cities, made that way by strong and smart leaders.
I also think removing someone from office should be a more commonly used tool of the public. Sometimes some people aren't meant for the job.
vicupstate...Mr Merserve received $100K plus for being involved in a Real Estate Transaction involving Vescor and supposedly doing nothing at all! I would love to do nothing at all and collect money in that fashion! DPBR seems to think this is a violation, for some reason, and it looks like the SA's Office will be looking into this! I am too old to run for office plus I have a habit of breaking things in half when I get irritated........not good for a public official. I hate ass kissing also!
I used to be in favor of term limits but it has proven to be an obvious failure. Politics is a career people train for and specialize in. We should start thinking of them less as public servants and more as the hired professionals they are or are not and scrutinized as such. I hate the way it feels to acknowledge that but there it is.
Voters have the burden of reevaluating elected officials and keep or dismissing them. Term limits is just shirking responsibility.
Quote from: JeffreyS on January 04, 2010, 12:57:42 PM
I used to be in favor of term limits but it has proven to be an obvious failure. Politics is a career people train for and specialize in. We should start thinking of them less as public servants and more as the hired professionals they are or are not and scrutinized as such. I hate the way it feels to acknowledge that but there it is.
Voters have the burden of reevaluating elected officials and keep or dismissing them. Term limits is just shirking responsibility.
I agree, Jeffrey. If we want to make the playing field more level, there are other ways to do it. Especially implementing actions that erode the main advantages of incumbency such as tit for tat, money raising, special interest connections, etc. One trait that could go either way for incumbents is dealing with the "devil you know versus the one you don't".
Specific ideas include campaign finance reform, transparency in dealings with lobbyists and special interest groups, non-partisan elections, greater access by new and less well funded candidates to media and other public forums reducing the need for expensive TV ads to get exposure, more face-to-face debates, sharper questioning by the media and other scrutinizers, more focus on the issues than the side shows of personalities and sound bites, etc.