Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Term limits -- for politicians, or for spending and bureaucrats?

I had a thought last night. It seems one of my Senators for Oklahoma, has self-imposed a limit on the numbers of terms he will serve, 12 years or two (2) terms, and he is not seeking re-election to the Senate.

And I got to thinking about that. So I wrote Senator Dr. Coburn:

Dr. Coburn, Instead of the warm fuzzy (and deceptive) banner of term limits for elective officials, please consider -- limiting the terms of Federal expenditures. Of every Federal program and expenditure. Require the dispersal, without continuation, of every Federal program. Perhaps a term limit of ten years for everything but the Uniformed Services, the Coast Guard, and the few other actions explicitly and specifically called out in the Constitution as direct responsibilities of the United States government.

Term limits impose a censorship on a people's rights to representation.

California, and indeed the Federal Executive Administration, show that term limits absolutely and completely fail to accomplish the stated goal, of avoiding accumulation of power in ways subject to corruption and tyrannical self-preservation.

Term limits push the accumulation of tenure, of gathering of sycophants, of establishing spans of control, down to lower, election-proof, bureaucratic levels. Meaning that term limits remove the possibility of an election righting a wrong. We see it in how bureaucracy in California, since embracing term limits in their state legislature, has lost control of the legislative process to union civil servants and tenured staff.

In the Administration, it has long been observed that Federal Bureaucracy has a lethargic inertia quite resistant to mere Presidential elections.

President B. Hussein Obama has used bureaucratic tactics to subvert Congress' role in checking and balancing the accumulation, and moderation, of power and control in the US government. From recess appointments to stacking the National Labor Relations Board, to his infamous "we don't have time" to let Congress perform it's required duties -- we see, blatantly, what term limits do, and must, accomplish. We see it in testimonies before Congress when Administration members fail to answer questions, when subpoenas are not answered, when records are not provided, when deception against Congress happens -- unchallenged in the public eye.

We don't need a change to the Department of Homeland Security, or the Department of Education. We need a new, fresh statement and establishment of need of today, for whatever role the government and nation intend and need for today, without regard to legacy.

We need term limits on bureaucratic staff, with a maximum Federal service of six years in any office within 100 miles of current, or any previous, position held in the Government by that individual. We need the skills, as nation, we need the experience -- but we cannot allow the accumulation of power networks and spans of control growing outside the control of the electorate citizenry.

Thank you,

1 comment:

  1. Yes! That would go a long way towards solving multiple problems.