Inexperience Matters

Billionaire for President

Tom Steyer, one of the billionaires running for President, just went off the air again.  His pitch:  “I’m going to make the Washington Establishment uncomfortable with two words:  ‘term limits’”.  He then goes onto extoll the virtues of limiting Congressional terms, saying that will help end the “corruption” of our government.

Of course Tom Steyer is in favor of term limits.  That concept fits with the entire basis of his campaign. He believes that someone whose life experience isn’t based in government and the machinations of Washington politics is the one who can fix the problems of our nation. Limiting terms match that view, and from his standpoint, there is only one Democratic Presidential candidate that fits the bill:  Tom Steyer.  That his approach sounds vaguely like the present President’s 2016 campaign theme should be disconcerting.

Yeoman Farmers

The concept of term limits goes all the way back to our Founding Fathers.  Thomas Jefferson wrote of the virtues of the “yeoman farmer”; who would put down his plow and rake, and ride into the center of government to repair our national problems.  After the crisis was over, the “yeoman farmer” would then ride off into the sunset, back to repairing fences and sowing seeds in the soil.  

That concept was also self-serving, as Jefferson, Washington, Madison and the rest left their plantations to ride off to the “big cities” of Philadelphia and New York to found our nation.  And while Jefferson and Washington were always worried about how their plantations were doing, the reality was that they spent most of their professional lives far away from the fields, barns, and slaves.  Jefferson was a professional diplomat, Washington a professional soldier, and both were professional politicians.

Jefferson in particular participated in the kind of job rotation that current “term limited” politician’s use today.  He started as a representative to the Virginia House of Delegates, and then was chosen as a Delegate to the Continental Congress.  He came back to serve four years as Governor of Virginia, then went back to the Continental Congress as a Delegate and Minister after the Revolution. 

Jefferson then went to France as US Minister for four years.  He came back to become the first Secretary of State under the new Constitution, and then Vice President.  Finally, he was elected President of the United States, served two terms in the office, then went back to his home in Monticello.  So from taking his first office in 1769, Jefferson was steadily employed in the government until 1809, forty years of service.  Not much time for planting and the myth of the “yeoman farmer”.

Inexperience Counts

As Jefferson’s career proved, experience counts in politics and government.   Apply the “term limit” concept to other professions and the problems become clear.  Say we “term limit” surgeons.  After they go through four years of college, four years of medical school, two years of internship and another two or more years of residency:  should we limit surgical careers to – say – fifteen years?  That way we will solve the problem of “old surgeons”.

Of course that really doesn’t make much sense.  We know that skills are learned and practiced, techniques developed, and experience counts when someone is cutting into the pericardium, or the frontal lobe.  There is no great “virtue” in inexperience when it comes to saving lives.  Do surgeons ultimately age out?  Of course, but arbitrary limits aren’t an effective solution.

Whose Empowered

If we limit the experience of those in government, then those around them who “know” will become empowered.   Those folks are already there:  we call them lobbyists.   They get a bad name for a good reason.  Lobbyists represent private interests getting influence in public government, often by giving or withholding campaign financial contributions.  

But lobbyists often bring more than just money to the table.  They also bring specific knowledge of “their” issue, knowledge that only years of experience can acquire.  It shouldn’t be a surprise that groups that want influence get the most knowledgeable people available to work for them.  Knowledge is power when it comes to writing legislation.  The less knowledge legislators have, the less ability they will have to see through the lobbyists’ self-interest.

Richard Neal, Congressman from Springfield, Massachusetts is a great example.  Neal has been in the Congress since 1989, fully thirty years.  Without a lot of fanfare he has become one of the most powerful Congressman as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the House Committee that deals with taxes.  He’s been a member of Ways and Means since 1993.

His experience matters in the complex arena of tax policy and regulations.  Term limiting would remove his kind of experience from the field, leaving the only knowledge in the hands of those who most have “an angle,” the lobbyists.

Effective Term Limits

Does it mean that all “the old men” in Washington are wise and have the best interest of the nation are heart?  Of course not, we know that there is corruption in Washington, corruption based in an electoral process that depends on millions of dollars in donations.  But term limitations won’t solve that problem.  Campaign finance reform, and Constitutional legislation to alter the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United would have a much greater impact on corruption.

If we get the money under control, that would remove the significant advantage of incumbency.  Get the money under control, and we can have effective term limits.   

They are called elections.