Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

State Sen. Dave Syverson announced his candidacy for re-election Tuesday by touting experience and a track record of serving constituents regardless of what party is occupying the governor’s office.

Incumbent Illinois Sen. Dave Syverson, R-Cherry Valley, announced his candidacy for re-election Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2021, at a campaign event at the Radisson Hotel & Conference Center in Rockford. […]

Syverson, R-Cherry Valley, said during his nearly 30 years in Springfield he and his staff worked to bring back to the are more than half billion dollars in capital projects such Mercyhealth Sportscore, the developing Hard Rock Casino as well as “roads, bridges, schools and other projects that we hope has reduced some of the reliance on property taxes.” […]

When [fellow Republican Eli Nicolosi], 42, of Loves Park, announced his candidacy [against Syverson] in July, he spoke of a desire to see term limits become law.

“Anything more than 10 years, you are pushing it,” he said. “And what I can tell you is 30 years is too long.”

* The Question: Is 30 years too long to be in one elected office? Make sure to explain your answer in comments, please.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:24 pm

Comments

No. We already have term limits - they’re called “elections” …

Comment by Anyone Remember Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:27 pm
-No. We already have term limits - they’re called “elections” …-

Thank You(banned punctuation)

Comment by AnonymousFool Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:31 pm
I agree with Anyone Remember. The long-term effects of term-limits is that the lobbyists and civil workers become the institutional memory.

Comment by cermak_rd Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:31 pm
Isn’t Dave the last of the “Seven Virgins”? Not everyone will get that.

Comment by Give Me A Break Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:31 pm
“Is 30 years too long to be in one elected office?”

Maybe.

But if it is, they can be voted out, and if it’s not, they can be reelected.

Lucky us, huh?

– MrJM

Comment by MisterJayEm Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:32 pm
yes,
Nothing against the Senator personally, but We need citizen representatives rather than long-term “Career Politicians.” need to decrease the influence of lobbyists/special interests. Lastly, term limits reduce corruption and would open our government to new people/ideas to better solve IL’s problems.

Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:35 pm
Context?

Chicago Trubune, 2005… a snippet;

===Rauschenberger, O’Malley, and Lauzen entered the state Senate in 1992 along with two other lawmakers whose elections were also heralded as a conservative renaissance.

Known as the “Fab Five,” ===

Syverson was one of the Fab 5… in 1992.

All that said, vote No, as always to questions of “term limit” thoughts.

But, the 1993 Syverson is far different than the 2021-2022 version. Thirty years will do that. This climate of GOP politics will do it too. The voters can decide if he’s too long fit the senate.

Voted No.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:37 pm
No. it’s not just about learning the craft, it is that good people contribute well to public service. giving them a nod for decades can be very good for government.

Comment by Amalia Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:39 pm
We have elections so I don’t think we need term limits. They people keep winning so the voters do have a way to get them out. Look at Bob Butler who was mayor of Marion, IL for 55 years. They loved him there.

https://www.dailyrepublicannews.com/news/20190422/robert-l-butler-1927-2019-iconic-marion-mayor-dies-monday-at-age-92-was-illinois-longest-serving-mayor

Comment by Publius Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:42 pm
== But, the 1993 Syverson is far different than the 2021-2022 version. ==

I have no problems with someone changing with the times. As a liberal voter, no way I’d keep voting for a Democrat who still harbored what were the main stream anti gay marriage position that many held 30+ years ago.

Comment by Homebody Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:49 pm
No. Term limits help create accountability. They have to deliver in order to get reelected.

Comment by chito Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 12:51 pm
Yes, unless the voters say otherwise and they have.

Comment by Tommydanger Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:00 pm
===I have no problems with someone changing with the times.===

Oh. You think I mean evolving, not devolving. Ah.

Yeah. That’s not what I meant in this instance to this candidate.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:07 pm
Syverson has been their too long in my opinion, but my opinion isn’t worth a hill of beans since I do not live in his district.

Totally opposed to term limits, I am a HARD “No”. As other have pointed out, we have elections.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:08 pm
Yes, no, maybe…it depends on the person. As long as they continue to serve the district and meet the needs of the constituents and gain and use their experience in a productive manner, 30 years is fine. If they kick back, collect a paycheck, and don’t do much, they should be tossed out. And that is for the voters in the district to decide. (Granted, it does not always work. There are a few who manage to occupy office while doing little or nothing. But that is for the voters to address. Term limits give voters a pass on being responsible.)

Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:11 pm
Absolutely No. Elections are the only term limits we need. The voters in his district can decide to replace him for not. Term limits move the power to staff and lobbyists which is exactly what Republicans want…weak elected officials who are lame ducks when they arrive in office.

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:19 pm
No, because elections. But these days I feel the need to qualify that with the word fair. People in whatever voting region need to be able to vote without undue barriers and also not to have their votes neutralized by excessive gerrymandering.

Comment by Earnest Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:36 pm
As long as he keeps his constituents happy, and they keep voting for him, 30 years is OK by me.

Comment by Bruce( no not him) Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:45 pm
I say ‘no..

I hear DE’s position “yes, Nothing against the Senator personally, but We need citizen representatives rather than long-term ““Career Politicians.” need to decrease the influence of lobbyists/special interests. Lastly, term limits reduce corruption and would open our government to new people/ideas to better solve IL’s problems.”

However, I feel that those are mutually exclusive.

Anonymous @ 1:19 pm, makes the point with which I agree most. If electeds are changed every eight or twelve years, the only institutional knowledge remains with staff and the lobby - hence the newbies will need to reply on them more than elected leadership. I mean, this already happens to some extent but, the staff, especially shared staff, are linked to the established leadership and know the will of their Legislators very well.

I don’t solely attribute it to the Rs but, they do bark about term limits a lot.

Comment by Proud Sucker Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:50 pm
Clyde Bunch has been on the Sangamon County Board forty-two years. What is the record in Illinois?

Comment by Al Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 1:50 pm
Yes, but as many others have noted we have a remedy for that if we want it. That said, I wish many of our veteran elected officials would self-limit more often than they do.

Comment by Ron Burgundy Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 2:00 pm
I’m sure Syverson has learned a lot–like never inviting Alan Keyes to the state and not replying to e-mails suggesting a threesome with Syverson, Rauschenberger, and Keyes at Wrigley Field.

Comment by ArchPundit Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 2:09 pm
On the serious question–people should serve as long as their constituents keep sending them back to office. A good mix of newer and older elected provides for experience and new ideas.

Comment by ArchPundit Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 2:10 pm
No. I do think its true that there is a high correlation between being in office that long and just coasting to the detriment of your constituents, but that is not a given, and, like others have said, that’s what elections are for.

Comment by Montrose Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 2:14 pm
Yes, 30 years is too long.
So he built a legacy of voting no on budgets and finding money to bring to his district based on the hard work of others.
None of that matters to his constituents. But it should.

Comment by Medvale School for the Gifted. Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 2:41 pm
If I had a principled opposition to term limits, then I would also oppose the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidential terms. I favor the limit on presidents.

Comment by anon2 Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 2:45 pm
Let the voters decide in each election cycle. This is a democracy. Support the democratic process.

Comment by Well-read guy Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 3:12 pm
Is 30 years too long to hold office? Well, that depends on whether or not they are doing a good job doesn’t it. If they’re not doing a good job, then we can always vote them out. Lord knows, it’s election cycle in Illinois.

Comment by Manchester Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 3:59 pm
Yes. In a perfect world, voters would have access to all relevant information and capacity to make a well-informed decision. However, the ability for lawmakers to choose their voters, hide or redirect attention from bad deeds, and consolidate power dilutes the ability of voters to fully serve their role.

Comment by thechampaignlife Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 4:16 pm
“If I had a principled opposition to term limits, then I would also oppose the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidential terms. I favor the limit on presidents.”
So you don’t have an opposition to term limits? Since it’s an “if.”
That’s a lot of words to say you support term limits.

Comment by Fly like an eagle Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 4:34 pm
Yes, 30 years is too long to do anything.

Comment by Furtive Look Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 4:50 pm
===I agree with Anyone Remember. The long-term effects of term-limits is that the lobbyists and civil workers become the institutional memory.===

Agree. And the lobbyists and staffers become the ones with the institutional power. If they keep electing him and he keeps wanting to do it–keep going.

Comment by Leslie K Thursday, Oct 7, 21 @ 6:31 pm