|
|
 |
 |
|
|
Posted February 4, 2002
Thugs, Ted and Term LimitsBy Charles Mahtesian
While lawmakers in the 17 other states with term limits have largely given up on the idea of repeal — some out of fear, others out of respect for voter will — in Idaho, the dream never died. Despite a succession of voter-approved ballot measures since 1994 and a recent state supreme court decision upholding term limits, the Idaho legislature remained steadfast, almost comically resolute, in its belief that the electorate was talking about someone else.
Finally, with the onset of term limits looming in 2004 and nowhere else to turn, lawmakers decided last Friday that they could wait no longer for the state to come to its senses. Overriding a veto by Governor Dirk Kempthorne, the legislature made Idaho the first state in the country to repeal term limits for elected officials.
There’s a pretty strong case to make against Idaho’s law — even term-limits supporters, for example, concede that in a small state like Idaho, ousting local officials all the way down to the dogcatcher is a bad idea. The problem is that the legislature didn’t make that case.
Instead, legislators chose a more disingenuous route. Rather than argue the merits, some claimed that repeal was warranted because, back in 1994, voters had been duped into thinking they could get rid of U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy. Others insisted that repeal was an attempt to provide relief to sparsely populated, rural counties that would have difficulty mustering enough candidates for office. That’s a more plausible argument than the Ted Kennedy defense, but it’s equally misleading. Every elected official in the state knows that the legislature could have done that long ago by allowing for a “local opt-out” provision whereby certain counties could be exempted from term limits on local officials. The House and Senate chose not to do this, however, because they recognized that the only hope of repealing their own term limits was by coupling themselves to the locals.
The most interesting pro-repeal arguments were saved for last, though. As the state braced for an impending vote, repeal advocates began railing against outsiders, manipulators and the other assorted “East Coast” charlatans who were allegedly snookering their unsuspecting constituents. Senate Majority Leader Jim Risch even released a last-minute radio ad decrying the “out-of-state thugs” who were attempting to bribe him into changing his vote.
Had Mafia leg-breakers suddenly taken an interest in Boise? Well, not exactly. As it turns out, the ersatz Tony Soprano was a former Idaho political operative who had leaned on Risch in a phone call, suggesting that the money and organizational muscle behind the term-limits movement could be useful to Risch if he were to run for statewide office in the future.
As contrived, self-serving and amusing as some of this might sound, it ultimately served a useful purpose. By muddying the waters, legislators successfully obscured the real issue at hand — the arrogance and cynicism of a legislative body that ran roughshod over the popular will. A few rural counties have consistently opposed term limits, but the only true hotbed of support for term-limits repeal is the statehouse itself.
Whether you think term limits are an unqualified success or a short-sighted and idiotic calamity, there’s plenty of evidence to support your position. There’s no need to drag Ted Kennedy, Tony Soprano or the East Coast into this.
Charles Mahtesian is a former staff writer for Governing.
Recently in View:
The Honesty of Numbers: a number-cruncher and misplaced suspicion (posted January 28, 2002)
Cities and the Right to Pop Off: public grass vs. public speech (posted January 21, 2002)
Who Are You, Really?: the national ID card we already have (posted January 14, 2002)
Honesty and Immigration: implications we need to think about (posted January 3, 2002)
Complete index of View columns
|
|
overnors have come and gone, hundreds of bills have passed and died, but for nearly eight years, there has been one overarching constant in the life of the Idaho legislature — a preoccupation with repealing the term-limits measure approved by voters in 1994.