Editor’s note: In 1990, California voters enacted term limits of 6 years for State Assmeblymen, 8 for State Senators, and 8 for most constitutional officers.

Arnold Schwarzenegger’s former communications director and solid conservative Rob Stutzman has penned an article in the LA Times about term limits. Stutzman said he used to be very supportive, but has since changed his mind after spending some time on the inside of politics.

This has always been a very tough subject for me. One the one hand, I see Rob’s arguments. Term limits have lead to legislators who are often very inexperienced and lack thorough knowledge of the Budget process and California politics. It also does lead to beholdenment to special interests as officeholders always need to look for the next position to run for.

And besides, it violates the spirit of Democracy that the people should be allowed to elect any representative they wish for as long as they are doing a good job. If a legislator is corrupt, the voters will “term limit” them.

But I also can understand the Pro-limits contentions. I have had personal experience with politicians becoming unresponsive to their constituents. A few years ago, a regional water agency proposed building a massive water intake facility just feet behind the back fences of our neighborhood. Our county supervisor since 1978 was on the board of said water agency. So did she use her position to mitigate the concerns of her constituents? No. She advocated the destruction of our property values, and even had the audacity to tell us that we “Needed to make sacrifices for the good of the region.”

The plans were eventually modified to resolve many of our concerns, but not with her help. She ignored the pleas of the people who elected her, entrenched in her position.

So I am really unsure about term limits. What are your thoughts?