I am pleased to see that the Unicameral's term limits-induced openings are driving record interest in running for state senator. I'm still very displeased with why those openings exist, but at least we're not facing a vacuum. Well, a vacuum of participation, anyway. A vacuum of experience and dedication is still a certainty.
It's an incredible relief to see that the article notes that many (most?) of the candidates aren't just local goofballs jumping on the opportunity to see their name on the ballot merely because the incumbent is barred from running. The last thing Nebraska needs is a California-style election. The candidates cited in the article actually have political experience. That doesn't automatically make them good candidates, but it increases the likelihood that they are at least semi-competent.
Still, competency has never been the issue for me in my post-term limits fallout complaints. There are literally thousands of individuals around the state who are competent enough to be excellent state senators. But the set of those individuals who are not only competent but also willing to serve is much smaller. And even then, the majority of that set lacks the practical experience to serve effectively in a body as complex as the Unicameral.
I foresee two possible outcomes from that lack of experience. The first is a legislative logjam. A painfully slow legislative process driven by inexperience-induced incompetence. I hope for this outcome. Less legislative action is better. It means less interference, less regulation, less spending, and more freedom. Slow, messy, ugly legislative processes are good.
The other possible outcome is a legislative process so slick and unencumbered that the body passes laws left and right. I fear this outcome not only for its implications for freedom, financial responsibility, and complexity of the state's laws, but also for its implications for the Unicameral itself. A Unicameral legislature is very susceptible to becoming a runaway process. A Unicameral is bound only by itself and the rules it sets for itself. Very, very few checks exist on the Unicameral. In many ways we are lucky the system has worked as well as it has. I wonder what effect institutionalized inexperience will have on the sustainability of the Unicameral?
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
Amen!
Partisanship may also run rampant as term limits make coalitions an unaffordable luxury to those elected officials who are on a short leash.
Say goodbye to the institutional knowledge our senior lawmakers acquired. I only hope the paid help is honest because there’s no way of term limiting the unelected.
I have never liked term limits, especially when people had an easy term limit - their vote.
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.