Newsletter

December 2007
Op-Ed: Proposition 93 - Term Limits...Good Choice or Bad Deal

Cedric Cheng

Most folks are not aware but there is a term limit proposition coming up on the February ballot (the one that we also choose the presidential nominees for whichever party you’re with.) It’s been slowly gaining some steam, mainly from other public official who are all of sudden running for their old office, multiple offices or not running even though they may qualify to run because their current term limit would disappear? That last part, you’re wondering, what am I saying? Well, Proposition 93 will be on the ballot. Basically, this proposition, on the February 5th ballot, would reduce the number of years legislators could serve, from 14 to 12, but allow lawmakers to serve all 12 in either the Assembly or Senate — or any combination of the two. Currently, legislators can serve up to six years in the Assembly and eight in the Senate. On the surface, it sounds good. Public officials can only serve twelve years instead of fourteen. However, the key is that the person can serve in either chamber for twelve years. The combination is up the officeholder. So for folks who’ve served for three terms in the Assembly, which is the current limit, can now go on to serve a fourth term, if elected. Theoretically, they can serve three more terms in the Assembly to fulfill the new obligation. They can’t run for office for either chamber afterwards.

First off, I’m not in favor of term limits except for the power of the ballot when we vote. That’s our real term limit. But we’re also complacent when we vote. Voting in folks and re-electing them to office for thirty years is the reason why the first term limit law were passed by the voters in the early 90’s. (Think former speaker and past SF Mayor Willie Brown as the poster person of that law). Now, this proposed proposition is “modifying it”.

The reason why this is not a good proposition is that it simply becomes a loophole for folks to stay in office longer. Because this proposition isn’t really well known (at the moment), it’s going to surprise most voters. I think that critical thinking and the ramifications if it passed needs to be paid special attention. We’re going to be inundated with emails, junk mail, and media blitzes that folks will be disillusioned to vote for it without thinking about it. It’s too important to let it go. Because this proposition can become politicized to the point of forgetting what this proposition is for, it’s important to be educated away from the rhetoric.

What I’m saying is that we should educate ourselves about this proposition. It’s only a matter of time when folks will see that their political careers are coming to an end and another term limit proposition may be proposed. The current law took effect in the mid-90’s and with the current public officials’ terms ending, here comes a “modification” of the current law....which is really, perceived or not, an extension of their terms, which defeats the purpose of having term limits. But on the whole, the term limit law should be abolished if we truly return to the real term limit power, our vote.