Our View

Our View

Time to revisit term limits for state lawmakers

Career minded politicians will certainly argue the point but, most Arkansans have always supported term limits, even though they got snookered into passing what was known as Amendment 3 two years ago, which gave lawmakers to possibility to serve up to 16 years.

Now though, thanks to a concerned Arkansan by the name of Skip Cook voters may likely have an opportunity to pass another term limits amendment, but will have to wait until 2018.

Cook’s proposed amendment was actually certified by the Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge. The measure would limit state lawmakers to serving a maximum of 10 years in both houses of the Arkansas Legislature, state representatives to six years and state senators to eight years. The measure also would prohibit the Legislature from putting future term limit measures on the ballot.

This latest attempt to return term limits is the result of a slick political maneuver lawmakers pulled in 2014 by proposing a ballot measure aimed at tightening ethics laws. The measure, officially called Issue 3, bans lobbyist gifts to state officials, prohibits direct corporate and union contributions to candidates and lengthens the time period before former lawmakers can become lobbyists.

The amendment was cleverly designed to place so much emphasis on ethics reform that voters would overlook the carefully worded portion that changed and lengthened the length of time lawmakers can serve.

It is widely believed that many voters simply didn’t know, they were not only supporting stronger ethics reform but also doubling and more than doubling the amount of time a lawmaker can stay in the Arkansas Senate and House.

It was, in many people’s opinion, that voters were deceived into passing Amendment 3. Up until two years ago Arkansas term limits appeared untouchable.

The 1992 ballot measure setting the term limits received a higher percentage of the vote than Bill Clinton, the state’s then-governor and a presidential candidate that year. Voters later rejected another ballot measure aimed at extending term limits by an impressive 40 points.

Critics called the term limits provision a Trojan horse and rolled out a 10-foot wooden horse at campaign events, evocative of the disguise the Greeks used to infiltrate and sack Troy in Homer’s Odyssey.

One poll by Suffolk University/USA Today correctly predicted the election’s outcome, estimating 56 percent of likely voters would gladly support the ethics reform amendment not realizing that by doing so they were also changing term limits.

Cook’s amendment is equivalent to the amendment backed by Restore Term Limits that failed to receive the required number of valid signatures to make the ballot for this November’s presidential election.

Restore Term Limits was “organizationally challenged” during this election cycle according to Cook.

The committee said it failed to gather enough signatures using paid petitioners after it was “blocked,” so says a volunteer coordinator for Restore Term Limits.

Attorney David Couch of Little Rock, who worked with Sen. Jon Woods, R-Springdale, and Rep.

Warwick Sabin, D-Little Rock, on what became Amendment 94, instructed National Ballot Access — a company that collects signatures for ballot initiatives, veto referendums and recall petition drives — not to allow canvassers to carry petitions both for the medical marijuana amendment and the term limits amendment.

Because Cook has nearly two years to collect signatures, he said gathering the required petitions shouldn’t be a problem.

Proponents for re-establishing term limits are of the opinion Arkansas voters should have an opportunity to have a second chance to address this issue and we certainly agree.