We often hear politicians whine about too much money in politics. Next time you hear one, I want you to scream two words at the television: term limits. If anyone ever acted on those two words, you would see less money in politics. I’m talking about the big slush buckets of money. The huge dollars […]
We often hear politicians whine about too much money in politics. Next time you hear one, I want you to scream two words at the television: term limits.
If anyone ever acted on those two words, you would see less money in politics.
I’m talking about the big slush buckets of money. The huge dollars that pay for the campaigns. The million-dollar bundles, the $50,000-a-plate dinners, Goldman Sachs money, and Warren Buffett and Koch brothers bucks. I’m referring to the teachers unions’ and Teamsters moolah.
All of it would shrink if we deployed those two little words.
To understand why, ask yourself: Where does the money go?
Some goes into the pockets of crooked politicians. We will only stop that when we stop the earth from spinning.
The rest of the money goes into campaign coffers — to pay for the next campaign. And the next campaign is pretty much all the time. For members of the House of Representatives, it really is. Their terms are only two years. Many of our politicians run continual campaigns. They pay pollsters and PR guys, consultants, and organizers continuously.
Congressman Steve Israel (Democrat from Long Island) retired recently. He said when he arrived in Washington, DC, the big boys told him he had to raise $10,000 a week, if he wanted to get re-elected. He did.
Who gives the money? People who want to be heard. The really big donors expect to be obeyed. Now you can tell yourself the big boys don’t really buy votes. They don’t really buy policies from politicians. What you tell yourself is as much a fairy tale as what I read to my grandson.
Of course, they buy votes. And influence, policies, and tweaks in the legislation that favor their cause.
How do they get away with this? By providing what the pols desperately need: Money for their next campaign. The pols need money like junkies need drugs. Enter the pushers.
Now, how would term limits help? Suppose six years in Washington was the max. And going to work for lobbyists after those six years was illegal.
Term limits would take away most of the need for campaign money and begging for bucks. The politicians would have less to sell — because they would soon be gone from the scene.
Special interests would not be so interested in them. Magnates would not waste their money on them. These birds spend millions to get a decent return. They don’t toss checks into coffers of politicians because they like their looks. They do it because they want something the pols can deliver.
Term limits would give the pols less to deliver. Term limits would make the pols less attractive to the guys with the bucks. And term limits would make the pols less needy for those bucks.
Term limits would give us citizen lawmakers. People would interrupt their careers to come to Washington. They would work a few years and go home. This would get rid of career politicians who spend their working years in Washington muck.
Would this weaken our Congress? After all, experience counts for something.
I don’t think so. The biggest companies on earth do all right with CEOs who stay for five or six years.
Term limits would lessen the need for the drug called campaign money. They would lessen the influence the big guys can buy.
Nothing is perfect in politics and mates. But term limits would probably do more than any other reform. And that is why they are probably the most dreaded two words in Washington.
From Tom...as in Morgan.
Tom Morgan writes about political, financial, and other subjects from his home near Oneonta, in addition to his radio shows. Contact him at tomasinmorgan@yahoo.com