Sections

No to term-limit change

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

You have to at least give Borough President Markowitz some credit for saying what’s on his mind.

Like every elected official, Markowitz doesn’t want to leave office. But while other careerist pols are using cagey asides to couch their contempt for the city’s term-limits law, Markowitz is openly, proudly, dismissive of the two voter-approved referenda that created the city’s current two-term limit for members of the Council, the borough presidents, public advocate, comptroller and mayor.

“Clearly I’m against term limits. I think the electorate made a terrible mistake,” Markowitz said on Monday at a gathering of all five borough presidents at his beloved Junior’s restaurant in Downtown Brooklyn. “I think it’s bad government.”

There is, indeed, a problem with term limits. In the name of creating a stronger, more-vibrant democracy, such limits deprive voters of one of their very reasonable options: sending a qualified, experienced public servant back for another term.

Both referenda — in 1993 and 1996 — included an unanticipated flaw: because term limits are not staggered, virtually all of the city’s elected officials — some of them actually worthy of re-election — are forced out of office all at once, leaving a potential void of leadership.

But whatever its flaws, the people have spoken: voters have shown, twice, that they want term limits — and that’s good enough for us.

We believe it is morally wrong for current officeholders to circumvent the clearly stated wishes of their constituents — especially when they would gain a direct personal benefit by doing so.

We might support Markowitz’s call for changing term limits if his power grab were not so blatant; a slight change in the current situation — like a three-term limit, perhaps — would be a reasonable option, but only under one condition: if the proposal was again put before the public instead of made in a classic backroom deal.

Indeed, there is nothing as egregious as a politician who wants to pass a law just in time for the law to apply to himself. Even in Congress, when a salary increase is approved, it doesn’t take effect until after the next election.

So until the pols are willing to take their case to the voters in a popular referendum, term limits are better off left alone.

Updated 5:08 pm, July 9, 2018
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

Reasonable discourse

Mike Curatore from South Brooklyn says:
If Markowitz says it's "bad government", then it must be the right thing to do. His moral compass is perpetually pointed toward the South pole.

Guess his interest in lifting term limits is his spineless way of admitting he'd have his head handed to him if he ran for Mayor.
Sept. 12, 2008, 11:54 am

Comments closed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter:

Optional: