Our View

Our View

With no term limits, expect more of the same

With the growing disdain with our political leaders the lack of leadership and the perceived attitude toward political arrogance, it was surprising to learn the committee promoting a proposed constitutional amendment to limit state lawmakers to serving a maximum of 10 years in the Legislature failed to collect enough signatures of registered voters to qualify for the Nov. 8 general election ballot.

The motivation behind The Restore Term Limits committee’s proposed amendment stems from the cleverly designed Amendment 94 that those individuals who oppose it say legislators tricked voters in 2014.

Before Amendment 94, state lawmakers had been limited to serving six years in the House and eight years in the Senate. House terms are two years and Senate terms are four years. Some senators were able to serve 10 years in the Senate if they drew a two-year term after winning in the election after once-per-decade redistricting.

Up until Amendment 94 it was the general consensus among most Arkansas voters that strict term limits was necessary to assure no politician would be able to become too powerful.

The Restore Term Limits representatives did obtain 50,000 signatures, far less than the 84,899 required, and said it would have taken another month to gather the remaining signatures. The deadline to turn the required signatures over to the state secretary of state’s office was July 8.

The committee said in a written statement that “though, we gather over 50,000 signatures… we were blocked from hiring enough paid circulators in the last two months to get all the way to the 85,000 signatures in the time required.

The attorney who worked with Sen. Jon Woods, RSpringdale, and Rep. Warwick Sabin, D-Little Rock, on what became Amendment 94, said it’s no surprise that the Restore Term Limits’ proposal didn’t qualify for the November ballot.

Attorney David Couch of Little Rock, who also has been promoting the proposed Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment, said he instructed National Ballot Access – a company that collects signatures for ballot initiatives, veto referendums and recall petitions – not to allow canvassers to carry petitions both for the medical marijuana amendment and the term limits amendment.

At that time, Bob Porto of Restore Term Limits, said Couch was telling independent contractors how to do their jobs.

Woods was quick to point out the proposed amendment promoted by Restore Term Limits committee “definitely went too far and it was unreasonable, so I’m not surprised there is a lack of support for it.”

It is obvious Woods is a proponent of the idea career politicians, similar to those in Washington, is better than limiting them to limited terms.

It is still the belief of many Arkansans term limits prevents politicians from gaining entirely too much control. But, by the same token, it must be understood it isn’t always the politicians we have to worry about.

After all, there are career lobbyists, career bureaucrats and governmental unions, all of which boils down to heavy-handed control over most any elected official.

Sadly, the average Arkansans has little influence as to the behavior of most politicians, particularly on the state and national levels.