A Stronger, Prosperous Ludington Requires Stricter Term Limits, Not the Reverse

[XLFD]

Term Limits.  They were called the cornerstone of Athenian democracy. In the days of the Republic, Romans were eternally vigilant about attempts to undermine them. George Washington and other founding fathers, including the Constitution's drafter James Madison believed strongly in them.

George Washington was disappointed that the Constitutional Convention did not put limits on the terms of the new Republic’s executive. He set an example of serving only two terms, a tradition which lasted without the need to be enshrined in law for nearly one hundred and fifty years.  James Madison in The Federalist, 39:  "If we resort for a criterion to the different principles on which different forms of government are established, we may define a republic to be, or at least may bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior."

So why is it that defenders of the status quo are always loudly complaining that term limits are “undemocratic?” Saying that if you like an incumbent and their politics, why should you be limited to the number of times you can vote for that person?

Term limits are a necessary limit on unfettered “choice.” From the earliest days of Grecian democracy, it became apparent that there were those who would exploit opportunities to hold power and then never relinquish it.  Those who would utilize their office's power and their growing influence to get an unfair advantage over anybody who might throw up a challenge.   Indeed fears of corruption and tyranny were among the reasons the Greeks and Romans were so adamant in including strict term limits on elected office holders.

The democratic ideal was, and should always be, that of selfless service. You serve because it is a duty and an honor. The idea of holding power in and of itself should always be considered antithetical to the concept of democracy. The ideal of Cincinnatus returning to his plowshares after saving the Roman Republic was one of the democratic legends that inspired our own Founding Fathers in their construction of our republic.

If you don’t think term limits are necessary to avoid abuses of power, just ask anyone from Belarus, North Korea, Egypt or a host of African nations. Even the Communists in China instituted a single ten-year term for their chief executive, wanting to avoid another dictator like Mao Tse-tung.

Opponents of term limits always tout the need for stability and continuity. Any incumbent seeking more time would subscribe to that. But long-term incumbency leads to smug and non-responsive government and discourages public discourse and participation, symptoms of political malaise that we see here in Ludington and many other places.  When buffered from serious electoral challenges, government tends to become insular and unaccountable. The ability to immunize themselves from public scrutiny fosters a culture where corruption can and will flourish.

Without exception, the current City Council rabidly oppose term limits for Mayor Henderson; Councilor Holman claims that they are “undemocratic” in that they deny the public the benefit of his honor's right to serve for over a generation. Apparently their vision of Ludington is to have career politicians dominating the democratic process and spearhead new ideas.

If our public servants cared so much for public participation, why would Mayor Henderson violate parliamentary procedure in frequently interrupting those that come before him with ideas contrary to his?  Why is he allowed to bend the rules favorably for some, and not for others who come before him with statements, by setting limits for those who are critical of the City's policies, and allowing others who agree with him to go minutes over their limit?

While the Council majority sanctimoniously pretends to be defenders of  democracy in Ludington, our recent history proves otherwise.

When a position became vacant when the City Treasurer resigned just after a City election, the remaining members quickly declared that the City could not “afford” the luxury of having a special election. Instead they would appoint someone already part of the system to finish the uncompleted term of Mary Reeds-Mortensen by committee vote.

Later on, when Third Ward City Councilor Scott resigned during that same period, the City Charter declared a special election needed to be held for those two offices, but instead they chose by committee one of their own who already was on a couple of City boards for the Councilor position.

Is that also in the City Council's definition of "Democracy" too-- to thwart the charter's provisions that is decidedly pro-democracy, with a tyrannical process of choosing by committee?  Nobody in the Third Ward had a hand in the process of choosing who was to represent them.  

Furthermore, our City Charter plainly states that  "The Council shall not ... divert to other public use any public park grounds without first securing the approval of a majority of the electors of the City voting thereon in any election."  Did they allow a public vote to install a dog park in over one acre of pristine Cartier Park (diverting that parkland to other public use) when the Charter declared it should?   No.   Will they obey the City Charter if House of Flavors looks to expand into the next block?  Who knows.

What Ludington needs, and needs soon, is someone in the Mayor's position who has fresh ideas and believes the City Charter along with the State and Federal Constitution should be followed.  Someone who will not use the office for his or his family's personal gain (or hers).  Someone who will not look the other way when ethics are twisted and laws are broken by his cronies and friends.

We used to have that, but we don't anymore.  Let's say no to the opportunity for four or eight more years of the same, but worse.  Vote against the ballot initiative to extend the Mayor's term limits from three to five four year terms.