COMMENTARY: Term Limits: The Time Is Ripe
By Stephen N. Reed
Every so often, the public gets so fed up with what's going on (or not going on) in Washington, D.C.
with their elected leaders that the hue and cry of "Term Limits!" comes up for conversation. This is
the sister sentiment to "Throw the Bums Out," for after all, who wants to see the new batch of politicians rot after putting them in over the old ones?
This term limits sentiment was understandable to me coming out of law school, though I didn't jump on board it at the time. I had decided to take a position with a popular public servant in Charleston, Secretary of State Ken Hechler. So my reasoning then was that, if the public continued to believe Hechler was doing a good job for them, they ought to have the right to re-elect him as often as they wished. Sounds good, doesn't it?
But the problem is that not everyone in public life is as scrupulous as Ken Hechler was. In fact, fewer and fewer are. While Hechler was pinching pennies, refusing to redecorate the offices, getting by with whatever budget was given him by the legislature, others in the statehouse were playing games. In fact, many of those with real power in Charleston and Washington seem to believe that they have been sent to enrich their family and friends -- not serve the people. While this is not uncommon elsewhere, it is particularly true in West Virginia.
So is it really so surprising that we have Congressmen in the First and Third Congressional
Districts who want us to believe that their skills as our Representatives require them to have 30 years
representing us? I know their friends' argument well: "As long as this is the system we have, we need
people like Rahall and Mollohan to serve up there long enough to get a good committee chair. Then they can finally do something for us!" Isn't this a sad mentality? We have to wait for thirty years
before a Congressman can do any good for us? What a slow ripening process!
But of course, this is false. While it's true that committee chairs in Congress wield some serious power now and then, isn't representing us the main reason we send someone to D.C.? In fact, isn't "represent" the root word of what their job title is? And if they're up to it, a good Congressman can do that well for us every day of the week, starting in their first term!
Right now, the people of West Virginia are much more concerned with the failed trillion dollar stimulus plan, the enormous national debt, and our tax burden than whether Alan or Nick Joe get awarded a plum by their leadership. More than anything else, we want those two Congressmen to stand up and advocate our positions in the halls of Congress, loud and clear. Getting a committee chairmanship is secondary to that important role of theirs. By far.
***
If we can agree that representing their constituents on an array of important issues is the first job of any Congressional representative, then the next question should be an easy one. What happens if the mad scramble for a committee chairmanship results in a Congressman actually going against their constituents' wishes in order to curry favor with their party bosses in Washington, D.C.
After all, they will need votes on certain bills, and these pieces of legislation may make their constituents legitimately upset. Obama's stimulus bill, which has set back our nation's fiscal situation enormously, is a prime example. Rahall and Mollohan, dutiful party men, went right along, no matter what the West Virginia voting public thought. Why? Because they know the game, the sad, political game that has engulfed us all long enough.
We need to change that game immediately, and it can only be done with new people in the Congress. We need to term limit ALL Congressional representatives to no more than five terms. This will not only allow fresh blood to have a chance to go to D.C., freshening the springs of democracy, but such a move will also allow more members of Congress to take a turn at heading those committees we hear so much about.
Directly after Germany's surrender in World War II, the people of Great Britain proved in astonishing fashion that no public servant is indispensable when they voted out Winston Churchill for Clement Attlee as their Prime Minister. This was a shocker at the time, as Churchill had been widely admired for his inspired leadership during that difficult war. But they were war weary and wanted a fresh start.
Churchill learned -- as should Rahall and Mollohan this year -- that no leader's accumulated power is as important as the people's will. If these two are unable to shake the people's nagging suspicion that they are creatures of Washington more than true representatives of West Virginia, then they should make ready their political retirement.
Stephen N. Reed is a former Metronews Capitol Correspondent and Charleston talk radio host, now residing in the Eastern Panhandle.