From the Heartland

This is my soap box, on these pages I publish my opinions on firearms and any other subject I feel like writing about.

Friday, January 07, 2005

Term Limits a Nebraska Issue Again

A Brief History
Nebraska voters enacted term limits in 1992 and 1994. The Nebraska Supreme court vacated the first vote by the people because the requisit number of signatures had not been gathered on the initiative petitions. 1994 vote was nulified by the U.S. Supreme Court on the basis that states can not limit ferderal terms of office. After another attempt in 1996 a Federal Appeals Court again shot down Nebraska voters. In 2000 Nebraska voters enacted a term limit initiative that has so far stood the test of time.
Because of term limits 20 of Nebraska's 49 One House Senators will not be able to seek rel-election in 2006. Senator Chris Beutler is seeking to change that. Beutler is apparently proposing a question that will require the citizens of Nebraska to vote on it yet again.

Beutler wrote his repeal proposal to squelch any criticism that he's trying to save his own hide; The repeal would not take effect until 2010, after he is forced from office.

Mighty nice of you Chris, to be looking out for the staus quo long after your gone.

"Look ... I don't have any self interest in this any more, I just think it's bad policy," Beutler said. "Our institutional memory is lost" through term limits.

Bad Policy?
Think about that one for a minute. What Beutler is implying is that the voting population of Nebraska is too stupid to make the correct decisions for the benefit of their own state and he wants to provide another chance for them to get it right. The 5th time might be the charm I guess. You'd think that after four it is pretty well settled that Nebraskans know what they want.

"Our institutional memory is lost" through term limits.
You say that like it is a bad thing Senator. Just maybe some of that "institutional memory" needs to be lost. How can a whole slew of fresh faces and ideas in the Unicameral be a bad thing. As it stands now too many of the elected are entrenched in the belief that they, and only they know what is best for Nebraska or any other state for that matter.

Year after year the citizens of Nebraska are subject to the self-appointed aristocracy forcing legislation down their throats. Yes some of it is good and necessary, but so much of it is, as Gunner expressed in a recent comment, the inbread nanny nature of politicians to control the masses.
In some ways I can see the benefit of term limits. Because of the apathy of the voting public at large, many representives are returned to office election cycle after election cycle, despite how bad their legislation and voting record may be. It is just too easy to vote for the encumbant. Actually doing some individual research to determine the best candidate just seems to be more than many people want to do.

But then again, maybe the people do know what they are doing when they keep re-electing their public officials and that is their choice. And there's the rub; I personally do not favor term limits. I believe that at some point a term limit will deny me the right to vote for a candidate of my choice.

In that Senator Beutler and I are in agreement;

Said Beutler: "I still don't understand why people would want to give up their right to choose whoever they please."

The bottom line though, is that the Citizens of Nebraska have been adamant in voting for term limits four times in the last ten years. The people have spoken ... repeatedly. It now begs the question; Why can't the elected officials that have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution grasp that fact and get on with the business at hand.

Chris I agree with you, but a majority of the citizens of the great state of Nebraska do not, accept that, suck it up and move on, your just wasting the taxpayers money with this hissy fit and there are just too many more important issues that need to be addressed.

No comments: