Brilliant, But You’ve Got To Go

Monday, November 12, 2012

Let’s try a little roleplay game.

First, imagine yourself - we’ll call you Ted, just for kicks - working for a company where you find a respectable level of success. So Ted spots a job a couple of rungs up the ladder he’d like to try out. He believes he can do it well.

Ted sets a goal to earn the position and, through a series of changes, the time finally comes when the big boss looks around and realizes he’s got the best candidate in-house. Ted gets the job.

By all accounts, Ted performs exceptionally well in the new role. Ted’s making a real diff erence for the company and for the employees and divisions that report to him. He’s not flawless, but Ted’s found a great fit and has a passion for doing the work.

Everyone’s winning.

After six years in the job, Ted’s boss walks in one day, shakes his hand and says “We really appreciate your heart for this job and the exceptional advances you’ve made. But the time has come for someone else to fill this position.”

“What?” Ted asks, sinkingslowly into what used to be his chair behind his desk.

“What did I do wrong? Did I mess something up?”

“No, no,” the boss says.

“We just have a policy around here that all executives can stay only six years, unless we remove them sooner. But nobody gets to stay longer than six years.”

“I was just putting together a strategy that would take us into the next decade, but I guess policy is policy,” Ted says. “Who’s going to take over?.”

“We’ve got a new guy coming in,” the boss says.

“New blood, new ideas and all that. He’s got no experience, but he thinks he can do the job. You need any help packing up, Ted?”

That, in a little less than a nutshell, is how I view Arkansas’ term limits.

Before 1992, Arkansanshad the power to exercise thoughtful term limits every two or four years, depending on the oft ce. They could, after considering all factors, choose to send an incumbent packing for home.

Then, in 1992, came the initiated act placing term limits on state oft ces. It passed with about 60 percent of Arkansans voting for it and 40 percent opposing.

So now, when voters of a state Senate or state House of Representatives district finds an exemplary oft ceholder, they’re forced to throw him out after two or three terms, respectively. It doesn’t matter if new candidates are complete idiots. The incumbent has to go because, and only because, he’s an incumbent.

Granted, term limits gets rid of scoundrels, but it gets rid of institutional memory and quality candidates at the same time.

I’ve accepted that term limits are probably here to stay. But the current six- and eight-year limits in the House and Senate, respectively, are only long enough to let elected representatives get their realbearings by the last term.

Then they’re out.

Politically, it would be diftcult for lawmakers to make the case for a constitutional amendment to change Arkansas 20-yearold term limits law. How can a lawmaker do it without sounding self-serving?

We need longevity in the state Legislature. When the “veterans” are entering their final term with only four years’ experience in state government, it’s a shame to cut the good ones lose and leave state government’s power among the lobbyists and career bureaucrats.

Maybe, just maybe, someone can come up with a positive message to voters about extending the limits and manage to get the matter on the ballot.

Longer service for bright, committed and knowledgeable lawmakers would be a good thing for Arkansas’ future. It doesn’t have to be a lifetime appointment, but Arkansas’ term limits law today barely lets lawmakers outgrow diapers before they’re have to give up their service to the people.

GREG HARTON IS OPINION PAGE EDITOR OF NWA MEDIA.

Opinion, Pages 5 on 11/12/2012