VOTING re Prop 93, Limits on Legislators' term in Office

[helenscott08]

I feel very strongly that we, the people, should be informed as to the matters we are voting on. So, my question is this.

I have heard and read both pro and con pieces about the above prop 93, term limits for Legislators'. Both appear to have a point. What is your opinion and why. I like to hear from others which can help me decide and hopefully vote correctly.

Thanks,

Please reply publicly.

helen

[lifequest]

The current law by initiative is that the state legislators can serve two concurrent terms of 4 years each in one house (Senate or Assembly) then get termed out and they usually go to the other house for two more terms.

The new initiative allows them to serve three terms of 4 years each in one house. So 12 straight years instead of 8.

The main problem either way is that the districts are so gerrymandered that almost all districts are safe for incumbents and there is no reason for them to fear the wrath of the voters. The Republicans always seem to have enough votes to thwart the two-third's majority required to pass a progressive budget each year. It stifles compromise and little gets done and they end up passing a budget with all kinds of accounting gimmicks.

I did vote yes on this one - more to get them out in 12 years instead of potentially 16 years.

Then again the governor is trying this budget slashing scam to do an end run around the legislature and get the public so upset that they give him a near dictator's power.

[Lenny]

I don't like ANY government telling me for whom or how often I want my rep to serve. I don't like this bill, nor any other that restricts same.
One could imagine that the learning curve stays down as special interests are served even a hearty portion of our tax dollars.
No, vote out ALL constraints....let the people decide solely.
I know, there are problems with that as well, but we ain't in heaven yet.:2cents: