Lawmakers are supposed to work for us — Passing transparency and term limits will make sure they do

Michigan Farm Bureau (MFB) is urging members to vote yes on Proposal 1 on the Nov. 8 general election ballot.

If passed, term limits become more flexible, allowing state legislators to serve up to 12 years, regardless of whether their time is spent in the House, Senate, or a combination of the two. Current law restricts state lawmakers to six years in the House and eight years in the Senate.

Former Michigan Chamber CEO Rich Studley is the co-chair of Voters for Transparency & Term Limits, a bipartisan coalition made up of groups — including MFB — that support Proposal 1. He provided the op-ed below to Michigan Farm News.

…

In 1992, I voted to amend our state constitution to limit the number of years a person could serve in Congress, state executive and state legislative offices. The proposal was approved by voters, but it wasn’t perfect. In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. vs Thornton invalidated the false promise made by proponents that Michigan could impose term limits on Congress that were stricter than the U.S. Constitution.

Thirty years later, we’ve learned several important lessons about term limits in Michigan:

1. Executive branch term limits work well and should not be changed.
2. Preventing politicians from having a lifetime career in Lansing was a good idea, but the lack of financial disclosure and a revolving door that spins too quickly has turned being a state lawmaker into a steppingstone for higher office.
3. The Washington, D.C. lobby group that misled voters in 1992 about term limits for Congress continues to raise and spend millions in dark money, but has failed to change term limits in Congress.

The good news is we can take a major step forward by putting power back in the hands of the people, cleaning up the system, and demanding more from our lawmakers by supporting Proposal 1, the ballot initiative for transparency and term limits that will be on our statewide ballots in just a few short weeks.

When it comes to the transparency of our elected officials, Michigan is ranked dead last in the country, according to a 2015 study from the Center for Public Integrity. Michigan is also one of only two states that doesn’t require candidates to disclose their personal finances, leaving us completely in the dark when it comes to their potential conflicts of interest.

That’s why it should be no surprise that career politicians and Washington, D.C.-based lobbyists are rallying to try to stop Proposal 1. Three politicians with a combined fifty-two years of experience in elected office sued to try to toss out the initiative on frivolous grounds – but their complaint was tossed out, losing 7-0 in the Michigan Supreme Court.

At every level of elected office, people are tired of politicians putting their own interests above the interests of their constituents. Requiring our elected officials to disclose their financial interests will help the public know if they are representing our interests - or their own.

Term limits have served the state well for three decades, but we can improve them and help ensure that we are getting even better representation. Our current law allows members of the Michigan House to serve three two-year terms, and members of the Michigan Senate to serve two four-year terms. We see how it works now: candidates get elected, and immediately start angling for the next rung on the political career ladder, creating a revolving door that may serve their interests, but does not serve the public’s. This leads to broken campaign promises, frustrated constituents, and a system run by the lobbyists and bureaucrats. Reducing the current 14-year maximum to 12-years, while allowing policymakers to serve them in either chamber, will strengthen accountability and allow legislators to focus on the people’s business, not their own.

In November, we’ll have the opportunity to vote ‘Yes’ for transparency and term limits in our state. Voting yes will put power back in the hands of voters by giving us the information we need — and deserve — to make informed choices when we show up to vote. Voting yes will also ensure that legislators have time to get work done for the people in their district - who, lest they forget, are the ones who put them there in the first place.