Here scatterwisdom provides an excellent argument for term limits, and he is right. Term limits would help, but consider how he defines the issue.
“The reason being, especially in local politics, is that incumbent has an inherent power to influence hiring and government purchase contracts. The result is that unless an incumbent really screws up, he will always have thousands of assured votes “in the bag” over a new candidate because of voter support by the job or contract holders, and their relatives and friends, who benefit as a result of the incumbent influence.”
Actually, the Federal Government spends almost twice as much as state and local governments combined. Combined with all the tax laws and regulations they control, Federal office holders have an enormous capacity to buy our votes.
The Federal Government has powers far beyond what the Founder’s intended. Therfore, if we think our local government corrupt, the Federal Government should horrify us.
What would term limits accomplish? Term limits would limit an incumbent’s ability to buy our votes, but term limits cannot solve the basic problem. So long as we are willing to be bought, candidates for public office will buy our votes.
We, not the people we elect, have corrupted our government. Because we are to blame for the people we elect, if we want save our republic, we must first reform our own behavior.