Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Don’t believe everything you read
Next Post: Is Facebook evil?
Posted in:
* From “How Do Electoral Incentives Affect Legislator Behavior?” a study done by Alexander Fouirnaies at the University of Chicago’s Harris School and Andrew B. Hall at Stanford University…
We compile a new dataset containing roughly 780,000 bills, combined with more than 16 million roll-call voting records for roughly 6,000 legislators serving in U.S. state legislatures with term limits. […]
Studying four states which provide estimates of the budget impact of specific bills, we find no evidence that electoral incentives encourage incumbents to propose or pass more fiscally irresponsible legislation, contrary to theories of myopic electorates and political business cycles. Taken together, the evidence suggests that electoral incentives successfully induce incumbents to exert productive effort.
* Summary of the term-limited legislator research by Journalist’s Resource…
* During the last term in office, state lawmakers sponsor fewer bills and pass fewer bills that become law. They also cosponsor fewer bills.
* “The reduction in bill sponsorship among term-limited legislators is concentrated in states where the term limits permanently bans incumbents from the office, as opposed to states where the term limit only requires them to sit out a term before running again.”
* Termed-out legislators serve on fewer committees and are less likely to be involved with top committees. In addition, they are less likely to serve as committee chairmen or chairwomen.
* Legislators who cannot seek another term are present for fewer committee votes, on average. They participate in fewer roll-call votes, on average.
* “These effects are larger … in state legislatures that pay higher salaries.”
How much of an impact term limits really have is kinda beyond my ability to understand the numbers in this study. Perhaps some of you smart folks can read it and tell us in comments.
(Hat tip: Mackey)
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 12:40 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Don’t believe everything you read
Next Post: Is Facebook evil?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Term limits combined with Citizens United = the rich buying all future elections.
Think about it.
Comment by 33rd Ward Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 12:47 pm
Term limits are the biggest overreach of government than anything else imho. It is the government telling us we’re not smart enough to know when to vote out our legislators, and need the government to tell us. Any Republican who says we need to shrink the size of government, but supports term limits is not being honest with their constituents. Term limits is government intervention at it’s worst.
Comment by Hottot Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 12:55 pm
“I can be voted out” is a hypocritical argument if you’ve gerrymandered your district so that you can’t.
Comment by AndyIllini Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 1:02 pm
@AndyIllini, then the solution is to try and stop gerrymandering, not to arbitrarily take away voter’s power. Hopefully SCOTUS will come down with something to help push back on gerrymandering.
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 1:14 pm
Term limits freshen up the “pool” of available legislators, but they also diminish the pool’s collective ability to legislate by utilizing institutional knowledge and other factors. Basically when there’s more people in the room who don’t have any experience at that kind of thing than do, I’m not surprised that introduced legislation drops off. People simply don’t know enough about the process to become good legislators or they just don’t care to.
Comment by Stark Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 1:25 pm
This is logical; once they are is term limited legislators have less need to deliver the goods for constituents since the election cycle is over for them. To me this is a good thing as Thoreau ( or was it Jefferson ? ) once said “That government is best which governs least”
Comment by Texas Red Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 1:30 pm
Term limits=senioritus
Comment by ste_with a v_en Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:08 pm
senioritis*
Comment by ste_with a v_en Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:23 pm
Lame Duck legislators have less currency to trade=no future votes to trade. So they are less effective.
They also have less reason to be interested in long term projects. Why start a journey you cannot complete?
Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:26 pm
Duh
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:28 pm
If I wanted term limits, I would simplify the process that allows you to get on the ballot. Then there would be more people able to run.
Comment by Outsider Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:45 pm
I oppose term limits, that why we have elections.
Nothing makes a ln incumbent work harder than a race or competition to replace them, not a clock by which they’d tome to serve gets to its end.
Fair maps might make legislators work harder and smarter, might make them look at their terms as a timed window to look effective, and be effective.
Never mistake activity for achievement. - John Wooden.
Term is ending, no chance for achievement of a goal, why be busy? They’re leaving. That’s it.
The threat of replacement due to losing an election may gin up more work product from legislators, I dunno, but the last months… what’s the motive?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:54 pm
– Study finds term-limited legislators less active on their way out the door –
“Challenged accepted,” says Non-term-limited Illinois lawmakers.
Comment by Leigh John-Ella Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:57 pm
Term limits reduces the power of the legislative branch and enhances the power of the governor. This is another example of this. If 20-30% of your members are checked out– especially your most senior members– the guv can work his/her will easier.
Comment by etc. Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:45 pm
=== Term limits is government intervention at it’s worst. ===
Another way to look at it is making the will of the people the law of the land. One crucial liberty is self-government. When you disagree with the policy enacted by elected representatives, then it’s “government intervention.”
Comment by anon2 Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:36 pm
As long as Gerrymandering is stopped I am fine with no term limits. Though it’s tempting to term out Madigan instead seeing him carted off in a box
Comment by Ron Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:06 pm
The President is term limited constitutionally.
No state has voted out term limits, except through legislative mendacity, not voters.
Term limits create diversity of race, gender, political, and legislative occupation.
Term limits are constitutional.
Anti-term limit forces have used the exact same arguments against term limits a decade before the term limit movement swept this reform into offices across the country, as they do now, regardless of the facts exposing these anti-term limit debating points as false.
If you are opposed to term limits, you are opposing legislative diversity. It is time to move beyong the white lawyer era of entrenched legislators.
Right?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 8:16 pm
Term limits get job creators excited with no oversight
Comment by Rabid Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 5:55 am
I’m opposed to term limits and no, VM, I’m not a racist.
China and Iran both have systems where the government decides who the voter can’t vote for. There were student demonstrations in both countries and many of the protesters were arrested and possibly tortured. We may never see true democracy in these countries in our lifetimes. But at least these kids know what democracy looks like. And it isn’t big government telling you who you CAN’T vote for.
Too bad we can’t say the same for US term limit advocates.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 6:07 am