So the democans have tried advocating for term limits for awhile, now the republicrats are talking about term limits. Idaho tends to get low outside marks when it comes to fighting corruption, by using retaliation against those who blow the whistle on wrongdoing. I guess term limits were a way to fight corruption, I think this is a situation of sounds good but could be a problem in the future. Imagine if your state or county picked a great governor or representative and you wish you could have him as long as possible, well sorry hes done just because the state decided there would be term limits on all representatives or governors etc. Idaho initiated term limits in the 90's and had them up in till 2002 when the law was repealed, they now want to try again with a for year term limit for, jobs like governor, treasurer and public schools chief. I guess Idaho thinks that the term limits can end corruption better then the people of Idaho, in my opinion the voters are the best term limits. The fact that corruption occurs is because of ignorance of the people and nobody but the people can be blamed for allowing corruption to go untested. If we the people watch how are elected officials vote, behave, and spend our money then we can have a better chance of having a great country. The problem of morals also comes in when talking about the people, if the people have no culture and have no morals, then they could just as easily vote for someone who wants to control the minority, or even themselves without knowing. Most laws are done with good thoughts in mind at least I hope, when wanting term limits I see what their trying to do. When trying to end corruption and create fresh ideas, your also ending freedom and crushing ideas. What if Idaho actually gets an amazing governor that has all eyes set on freedom, and I mean the whole cake by cutting government programs cutting the income tax. I think the people would want someone like that to stay in office, but with term limits hes only got 4 years. So just now finding out that Idaho and my home state of Michigan are the only 2 states that dont force public officials to disclose there personal fiances like place of employment, asset and property ownership, and business associations. I'm very disappointed to hear that Michigan would allow people to run for office knowing they would not have to disclose this information, because there is a difference between a private citizen and a public servant. If your worried about disclosing this type of information then I dont want representing me in any form. I hope when people vote in Idaho and here in Michigan that they only vote for those that willingly disclose there information. They have some laws where they make people coming out of office to wait 24 months before becoming a lobbyist..... We know how to end lobbyist guys I've talked about it before, we cut down the power of the government. Want to end the educational lobbyist well you end the department of education, and this goes for every government department. So the question is should we have term limits? My answer is no we already have them its the voters, the same goes with any regulations do you need a law that says a business cant charge double the amount he paid for a product, no if the product is to expensive you will go to his competitor which is a pretty harsh regulation. Well thanks for reading guys! please upvote, follow, and check out the next post!
