End seniority in federal government
Frustration with politics often leads to thoughts of term limits. It seems reasonable, and there are term limits already at the top of most levels of government (president, governor, mayor) which work well. But where it has been tried, the result is not what was hoped for.
Running the government, especially at the federal level, is not at all like running a business; the two things have very different aims and methods. Like any job, there is a learning curve to it. Politicians may be term limited, but lobbyists are not. They are quite happy to take over the task of writing laws and regulations, favorable to their clients, for politicians who are still learning. With term limits, it is even easier for special interests to get their way.
A better solution to our frustration with politicians would be to end the practice of seniority in the federal government. This practice chooses committee chairs and other positions of power according to the length of time in Congress, not by competency or vote by peers. Seniority is the primary reason we see so many members of Congress in their 70’s and 80’s, hanging on to their positions despite obvious infirmities: they have the power now that they always wanted. Without seniority, younger members with fresh ideas would be able to assume more powerful roles sooner; there would be a lot more turnover in Congress, which is ultimately what the idea of “term limits” is about.
John Bogaard
Houston