Advertisement

Latest News

July 5, 2023
|

You’ve heard the saying, "Two things you should never watch being made -- a law and sausage." I don't agree with half of that. I've been involved in lawmaking as a Lieutenant Governor presiding over the State Senate and as a Governor negotiating every step of the process with a legislature that was 90 percent Democrat. I've also seen sausage made.

I still eat sausage.

For the faint of heart and those without a strong stomach, seeing the process of politics become the process of governing can result in serious reactions. It's not a pretty process. It can be tedious, exasperating, and embarrassing. But let me let you in on a little secret: it’s supposed to be!

Recently, some Congressional Democrats have been publicly ranting over what an offense to “our democracy” it is that they can’t ram through their agenda with a one-vote majority. Some are pushing to blow up the system that slows down their efforts to enact what they claim “the people” (i.e., “them”) want, from eliminating the Senate filibuster to stacking the Supreme Court with partisan political appointees.


POLL: Do you support term limits? Vote here.


This is what John Adams called “the tyranny of the majority.” It’s not only poison to the American system, it’s also a really stupid political tactic. Apparently, Sens. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin were the only Democrats who understood how dumb it is to strip all power from the minority when you’re just one election and one seat away from being the minority yourself (see the 2022 House elections.)

As hard as it may be to believe, making a law was never designed by our Founding Fathers to be quick and simple. When they wrote and approved the Constitution, they intended for the passage of a bill into law to be a hard slog. They feared that passion would overwhelm reason and thoughtfulness, and so they built in plenty of speed bumps to make sure that a bill never whizzed through Congress and got signed by the President as hurriedly as some celebrities go through rounds of rehab.

Now, I'm pretty sure that the Founding Fathers didn't want total gridlock in Congress, but as much as it may surprise you, they would prefer gridlock to haste. Why? Because they feared government in the same way I fear snakes, spiders, and sharks. They knew that the sheer power of it is an intoxicant and that most of the people who enter government will be like sixteen-year-old boys with keys to the liquor cabinet whose parents are gone for the weekend.Watching Congress make laws and oversee regulation is a lot like watching sixteen-year-olds with booze and a BMW. You get the distinct impression that they have no business with either one, and a crash is inevitable.

This is why I have long been a proponent of term limits, which are hardly a new idea. The concept dates back to ancient Rome and Greece, with the great Greek philosopher Aristotle observing, “It is not so easy to do wrong in a short as in a long tenure of office.”

This idea was most famously summed up many years later by English historian, politician and author Lord Acton, who said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” The current DC bureaucracy seems to be trying their best to become a living illustration that absolute power corrupts absolutely and turns you into a bad person.

In 1807, half-way through his own second term, President Thomas Jefferson warned that "if some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life."

The popular novelist James Fenimore Cooper summed up the prevailing American attitude in 1838 when he said that "contact with the affairs of state is one of the most corrupting of the influences to which men are exposed." This might explain why so many of them retire (if they ever do retire) as multi-millionaires after a life selflessly devoted to “public service.”

Historian Robert Struble notes that the American preference for turnover in leadership was so deeply ingrained that it took until the twentieth century for the concept of “career politicians” to take hold. Unfortunately, among the many bad ideas that arose in the twentieth century, like Nazism, socialism, and letting movie actors talk, came the argument that a lifetime of "experience" in government was a far more valuable asset than a fresh perspective or a knowledge of business, farming, or other fields in which the vast majority of Americans work. Not everyone swallowed that argument, including twentieth-century Presidents of both parties.

In 1953, after deciding not to run for a third term, Democrat President Harry Truman said:

“In my opinion, eight years as President is enough and sometimes too much for any man to serve in that capacity. There is a lure in power. It can get into a man's blood just as gambling and lust for money have been known to do.”

Interesting quote, considering that he became President only because he was Franklin Roosevelt's Vice President when FDR died in office shortly after being reelected to his fourth term.

Republican Calvin Coolidge, who was President in the 1920s, said:

“When a man begins to feel that he is the only one who can lead in this republic, he is guilty of treason to the spirit of our institutions...It is difficult for men in high office to avoid the malady of self-delusion. They are always surrounded by worshipers. They are constantly, and for the most part sincerely, assured of their greatness. They live in an artificial atmosphere of adulation and exaltation which sooner or later impairs their judgment. They are in grave danger of becoming careless and arrogant.”

Old “Silent Cal” must have been truly passionate about this subject because I believe those are the most words he ever said in one sitting.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

More Stories

Remembering September 11th

The Meaning of Memorial Day

The problem with Socialism

Comments 61-70 of 75

  • Claire M Doan

    12/30/2022 07:17 PM

    Right on - I'm all for it!

  • LINDA FLORES

    12/30/2022 07:07 PM

    I agree with you, Mr. Huckabee ! There is a great need for term limits! To many in the house and senate are arrogant think only of what they want not what is best for our country and citizens!

  • Karen Wies

    12/30/2022 06:43 PM

    So very well said Mr. Huckabee. Thank you

  • Beth Mulvihill

    12/30/2022 06:41 PM

    You are on target. George Washington said to stay away from the 2 part system it was to corruptible. We didn't listen and here we are. Majority of Americans have corrupted themselves with the gifts corrupted politicians have given them.

  • Edward Finley

    12/30/2022 06:35 PM

    Yes Sir I agree with your premise Mike! I just have concerns as to whether these money grubbers in congress have the honest where with all to ever turn loose of their "Cash Cow" positions in Congress, seeing that many of these folks have enriched themselves off of our dime.

  • Dr. Lester Robbins Henderson, Jr.

    12/30/2022 05:15 PM

    It is, sadly, the nature and disposition of almost all people, especially those in politics, that as soon as they are elected and acquire a little authority, as they presume, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion and seek self aggrandizement, and work for their own self interest rather than that of those who elected them.

  • Susan Askew

    12/30/2022 03:43 PM

    Thank you for this article on term limits! The quote from Pres Coolidge was spot on. “Careless and arrogant” is the point I believe social media and the “news” outlets have led many Americans to live in daily. Celebrities give advice on taking medications, financial management, what to eat, wear, or even how to raise (or terminate) our children - all as though they’ve been endowed with supreme omniscience from the thousands of followers and likes they get fed daily. What we don’t get fed daily is how to live humbly. Why is that? Oh, maybe because humble people of action don’t live stream what they do and track their follower's reactions - they simply DO whether anyone is watching or not. Honor and integrity are doing the right thing even when no one sees you do it. My parents always taught us that true generosity is done under the cloak of anonymity. Problem with that is, if we keep to that thought, others will rarely see an example of that kind of generosity. We will emulate the things we admire, and even like envy, we will admire the things we see most often. I hope to see more of the good news stories in 2023, less name calling between public figures, and more selfless good works celebrated. I hope you will lead that charge in your newsletters and appearances!! Good people must keep their standards, and continue to help lift up others doing good in the world. As Pollyanna’s locket said, “If you look for the good or bad in man, you will surely find it.” Here’s to spending 2023 looking for, finding and celebrating the good in mankind! Happiness is a choice - help your readers remember happy is always an option! Be happy, be blessed, be honorable, and be strong in 2023!! HAPPY New Year!

    PS- would love to see you come by N Alabama sometime! We have a fire pit out back and time to chew the fat awhile if you do.

  • S T

    12/30/2022 08:28 AM

    California has term limits, and the result is that most of the legislators don't have enough experience to know how to write bills, so the bills get written by lobbyists. I don't see that as an improvement.

    Is there any objective evidence that term limits produce better legislation?

  • Patrick Canan

    12/29/2022 10:24 PM

    Thank you for your column on Santos/Biden fabrications. Politicians should pay a price for lying. That wouldn't end it, but it would be a giant leap in the right direction.
    One thing that drew me and Irma to your 2008 candidacy was that your honesty shone like a beacon.

  • Keet Parakeet

    12/29/2022 08:58 PM

    I don't favor Term Limits. Reasons Why:
    1. My state has them. It's Bad. It means small population towns, townships and the like can't get enough good people to fill the elected jobs running them. Even using the musical chairs method - a necessity!, it's a problem. You need experience to learn to do the job. By the time you know (& can figure out where the bodies are being buried by the permanent employees), you have to move on. That means bad government AND more expensive government AND musical chairs plus costlier name recognition campaigns due to the musical chairs and the fact the unelected hired hands/bureaucrats end up with both more power and more opportunity to steal from the public till--which they have done. Convictions for embezzlement along with resigned quietlys are up.
    2. It doesn't address the other problem that ending the Spoils System via bureaucrats created. Unelected, eternal career bureaucrats exercising what should be elected political power & authority, think usurpation and the Their Conviction They know how it works & the Conviction You little nonbureacrtat should lick their boots & if you don'tm the rules & orders get issued to impoverish or enslave you without benefit of tacky things like kidnappers, wars, disgruntled brothers, slave markets, etc. Some problems can't be solved. The Spoils system - $$ stolen, political pay offs, etc.- was Bad. Bureaucracy - produces much of the same result. Reason: people can & will do evil for profit, spite, ego or power. Legislation is to discourage bad behavior, not end it. That requires God. Term Limits aren't God. The state bureaucracy isn't subject to tenure limits while the state politicians, great & small, are. Government is less responsive to the people, harder to keep uncorrupt, and the party system is much less responsive to local or clean government movements. You can't vote the bureaucracy out. If you're going to term limit the politicians, you need to figure out away to put the bureaucracy on a term limit of a similar nature, both preferrably longer than 2 measely election cycles, to level the playing field.
    3. Problem: both the politicans & the bureaucrats tend to get reemployed in the industries that are regulated. Granted they need to earn a living when they leave. Every person should be alloted the right the earn an honest living. Under law in much of the colonial & post colonial period, one could only sign an agreement not to practice one's trade or profession after selling one's business for 1 year. It was to keep the person selling the business from becoming a public charge (Publich Charge refers to Ye Old Days welfare to keep the poor from starving, often administered through the favored Church of Englad or the Church of the colony/state). Like I said: straight up political office Term Limits are Not a Solution to the problem. They are a different set problems of the same sort. The result here was a situation worse than the one before the term limits.
    Suggestion: put the idea on the back burner til one can figure out a method that might work.
    Keet