By John Bebow - May 29, 2008
Highlights from Thursday morning's lively discussion at the Grand Hotel over Michigan's 15-year-old term limit law and how to make the Michigan Legislature more effective...
Term Limit champion and Lansing economist Patrick Anderson found himself on the hot seat as many among the crowd of more than 100 statewide leaders were clearly restive over the lack of problem-solving in Lansing. (So are the citizens at large -- see page 3 of the Center's "Common Ground" report.)
Anderson resorted to an introductory history lesson, outlining how the concept of limiting politicians' time in office dates back to the citizen farmers of the 18th Century who made laws and then had to go home and live under them.
Anderson's history lecutre inspired ire from former Democratic State Representative Maxine Berman: "I've gotten over the Articles of Confederation myself," Berman sniped from the audience during Q & A. "And as for living under the laws you make, I live under every one of the laws I made. You should've seen me when I shopped in the grocery store. It took me longer than everybody else to get through the store."
Panelist Joe Schwarz, (a Center for Michigan steering committee member) decried Anderson's argument that term limits provide a good check on the power of incumbent lawmakers. "Term limits have given lobbyists and staff extraordinary power," Schwarz said. "This is not the 18th Century. This is the 21st Century. We need experience.... These are complex times... Remember the closing scene from the movie, 'The Candidate,' where Robert Redford asks, 'What do we do now?' Well, that's the Michigan Legislature under term limits."
Schwarz, a Battle Creek Republican, related how he and Morris Hood, a Detroit Democrat, would crack beers in Hood's state Senate office while fighting over the state higher education budget. It was an example of the kind of trust and relationship-building that was part of the Capitol culture before term limits turned Lansing into a more partisan and much less proactive place.
Anderson later circled back to Schwarz's folksy beer tale.
"Let me ask you something," Schwarz said, deviating from the term limit topic to challenge Anderson's political allegiances. "Are you a conservative or a libertarian?
"I am a conservative," Anderson answered in measured tone.
"Why do I find that hard to believe," Schwarz poked.
"Maybe we haven't drunk enough beer," Anderson said.
Anderson got off several other provocative thoughts despite tough challenges from audience members and session moderator Nolan Finley, the editorial page editor at The Detroit News.
"Congratulations on running," Anderson told an audience member who announced during Q & A that he planned to leave his business to campaign for state House. "Twenty years ago (before term limits kicked out entrenched legislators) you'd have no shot. Now you do."
Beyond the barbs, two pieces of news and one takeaway came out of the session...
First News Item... Kalamazoo Regional Chamber of Commerce President Steward Sandstrom announced his organization's proposal to impose a part-time legislature in exchange for longer term limits was dead (at least for this year) because the movement hasn't collected enough signatures to get on the ballot. Click here for a detailed discussion of this approach.)
Second News Item... Anderson said he and other term limit champions were willing to talk with term limit critics about how and whether to lengthen term limits.
Takeaway... Solutions to the lack of experience and trust under the Capitol dome won't come through a ballot proposal this fall. But my guess is we could lock Schwarz, Anderson, and Sandstrom in a room for a couple hours and they'd work out a popular common ground proposal that statewide community leaders could then take to skeptical and cynical voters.
2 Comments
Term Limits. A red herring for vested interests.
Either the job is much to complex for a lay person to engage in or the people who run for office are too inexperienced and/or lack the ability to learn quickly.
In either case paying an inexperienced employee $79,000 annually, with $12,000 for expenses (You forgot the staff and office space, franking privilege and support activities) and health care does not make any sense.
Before we race to once again tinker (Note: All these words and studies are fine but unless you carry forward and define the root cause you are wasting everyone's time: Finding root cause is a simple process that is very hard to do - ask the question "Why?" seven times) with the system why don't we, those who have a desire to improve the art of governance, take a good, hard look at the dsyfunctional system we have created. Stop wacking away at the leaves of the disease and rip out the damn roots!
Achieving full pay and benefits the first day on the job certainly doesn't do much for the motivation to learn and grow.
And then we have the system of House and Senate rules and bylaws that have accumulated over the years. Rules that only someone who has been in place for a very long time can begin to comprehend. Rather silly to create such a system and even sillier to expect that the system will operate with effectiveness.
Stop making new laws (tinkering with the system) and begin the process of making government more effective (efficiency follows effectiveness). Clean up the mess we have made first.
Education is a good place to start. Instead of legislating more rules, policies and punishments back off and let those who know best(teacher and parents) begin to fix the real problems.Secondary education that is nothing more than day care for virtual adults; what else is a system that fails 30% of its customers and produces individuals that hate learning? Why do we hire all these teachers and provide one of the best compensation packages in the nation? So we can, through the good intentions of a Department of Education enforcing legislative direction, micromanage everything they do in the classroom down to the hour, minute, item of content and how to make a proper seating chart. The way we administer education in this state is a travesty.
Change the entry level pay scales and benefits for legislators and increase them gradually, over time. If someone has served in local office and been elected to the state level their entry level could be higher.....
Provide bonuses to those legislators (and their staff members) that root out and get rid of arcane rules of procedure and overly complex processes linked to the past. In other words, reward improvements in the process. When were the rules of the House and the Senate last reviewed for effectiveness? Has anyone ever "value streamed" a rule, a process or procedure? Show a direct linkage between the change and improved services to the taxpayer. Pay for this with the savings from graduated pay scales.
Let teachers do their job, with the administrations and bureaucracies demonstrating how their policy and practice add value to the learning process; and spending some of their highly paid time in a real classroom so teachers can have time to earn their compensation in a way that encourages learning (and develops their skills as teachers - most in service is useless seat time).
Insist that the Federal Government provide scientific proofs that validate the use of AYP, standardized testing and reward and punishment strategies. (Hint: there is no scientific basis for any of the NCLB requirements; 100% proficient as a requirement should ne a hint - when was the last time you were perfect in every way?)
No more new roads, even if it means giving up Federal money. Concentrate on rebuilding the infrastructure we have.
We do not need tinkering, reform or incremental change; we need a revolution.
Chuck, you make a lot of good points and suggestions there.
thanks!
Post a Comment