Can you name the starting lineup of your favorite sports team?\u00a0 Most people can\u2019t. Studies indicate<\/a> that most people can remember 7 things plus or minus 2 (i.e., 5 to 9) at a time.\u00a0 Thus, most people could remember the starting lineup of a basketball team but not a football team.<\/p>\n Our political process is convoluted in numerous ways, one of which is that in most elections, voters are asked to be familiar with far more candidates than is reasonable.\u00a0 In the November 2010 election in Harris County (Houston), TX, voters faced the longest ballot ever<\/a>.\u00a0 Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman gave a vivid demonstration of the daunting list of candidates by unfolding a ballot that extended to nearly her height.\u00a0 Each voter was expected to be knowledgeable about all 72 judicial contests as well as a number of others.<\/p>\n In straightforward terms, the Harris County ballot was not of a human scale.\u00a0 It was a ballot on steroids.<\/p>\n We might call this phenomenon \u201ccandidate-flation.\u201d\u00a0 It is happening all over the country.<\/p>\n Where I live in St. Louis County, Missouri, there are 91 communities with taxing authority<\/a>, 23 fire protection districts, and also 23 school districts<\/a>.\u00a0 There are two clear problems with this system as it impacts voting.<\/p>\n First, each voter has to make decisions in up to fifteen federal, state, and local elections. Additionally, there can be a myriad of referenda and constitutional amendments on the ballot. Most of these contain complicated language; many have contradictory wording.<\/p>\n Second, the aggregate of all the elections for all offices in St. Louis County can mean that there are hundreds of candidates.\u00a0 Even if the media wanted to cover all of them it would be virtually impossible to do so.<\/p>\n For decades there have been efforts to consolidate government.\u00a0 A streamlined system would be easier for voters.\u00a0 Additionally it would simplify the jobs of those responsible for implementing policies. With a few exceptions, consolidation has not been implemented.\u00a0 Why?\u00a0 Because it means that elected officials are going to lose their jobs.\u00a0 They don\u2019t like the idea of losing fiefdoms.<\/p>\n There has been a considerable increase in the term-limit movement since the Watergate era of the 1970s.\u00a0 The limits are a reflection of the \u201cthrow the rascals out\u201d mentality.\u00a0 Term limits do bring fresh, but not necessarily better, faces into the political arena<\/p>\n Term limits have made the system more complicated for voters.\u00a0 There used to be \u201cold standby\u201d candidates whom voters had known for decades, and whom they either automatically supported or opposed.\u00a0 Term limits means that every six or eight years, the familiar names disappear to be replaced by someone often unknown to them.<\/p>\n Watergate was key because it reinforced the idea that both the raising and spending of campaign money could lead to mischief.\u00a0 In its wake, groups formed to regulate campaign financing.\u00a0 Some even called for the abolition of private donations.\u00a0 Campaigns would be financed by limited grants from government.\u00a0 Public financing would reduce temptations for corruption and also provide a system in which challengers could have financial resources equal to those of incumbents.\u00a0\u00a0 Such a system would provide a natural turnover, and deserving, fresh faces could be elected.<\/p>\n It is not a surprise that monied interests opposed public financing, banning their contributions to candidates.\u00a0 So corporations, interest groups, wealthy individuals, and others who had a stake in gaining special influence with politicians came up with term limits as the alternative.\u00a0 Term limits would satisfy voters\u2019 desire to \u201cthrow the rascals out\u201d in a timely way.\u00a0 However, the funders would retain their roles as major influencers in the political arena.<\/p>\n The campaign finance reform movement was initiated by progressive individuals and groups to try to level the playing field.\u00a0 The movement has stalled because, as expected, there is little support for it among incumbent legislators.\u00a0 Additionally, there is a legitimate argument that forbidding private contributions might be a violation of the First Amendment\u2019s guarantee of freedom of speech.<\/p>\n Lobbyists had another reason for supporting term limits and opposing campaign finance reform.\u00a0 Term limits meant the elimination of \u201cwizened veteran legislators,\u201d the individuals with the greatest institutional memory and knowledge of how the system works.\u00a0 Lobbyists have become the masters of procedure, and hence sneak through their pet projects.<\/p>\n For all of its shortcomings, term limits may be the key to consolidating government.\u00a0 They can be used to eliminate unnecessary political offices.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the way it would work.<\/p>\n A transition period\u00a0\u00a0would be established in which no political offices would be eliminated.\u00a0 Thus Ms. Kaufman in Harris County, TX\u00a0 might wind up with an even longer ballot.\u00a0During the transition,\u00a0 a system of consolidation would be developed.\u00a0 First, we would develop a list of offices to be termed out.\u00a0 The time frame could\u00a0 be by years (5, 10, or 20).\u00a0 Another\u00a0option would be to eliminate the office after one or two more individuals had served their terms.\u00a0 In any\u00a0event, within 20 years or so, many unneeded offices would be eliminated.\u00a0 These would be offices that voters would\u00a0 not have to worry about. This idea is not yet \u201cready for prime time.\u201d\u00a0 But most of our problems are going to take one or more generations to adequately address; we\u2019ve been in a period of sustained obstructionism and inefficiency.\u00a0 If you prefer government to stay in the background, you can still elect candidates who support that notion.\u00a0 However, if you think that government can be the solution to certain problems, attrition through term limits would finally give you a level playing field.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Can you name the starting lineup of your favorite sports team?\u00a0 Most people can\u2019t. Studies indicate that most people can remember 7 things plus<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":10127,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[162,128,573],"tags":[1124],"yoast_head":"\n
\nWhen consolidation is\u00a0 completed, a voter could go to the polls and actually only have to\u00a0remember the magic number of 7, plus or minus 2, items.
\nWhat would be left\u00a0 could be that magic number of seven \u2013 seven offices:<\/p>\n\n