A new study by the Platte Institute argues against Amendment 3 on this November’s ballot, finding that “incumbency provides a significant electoral advantage to sitting senators and stifles competition from challengers, issues that would be exacerbated by allowing incumbents to run for a third term.”
The report also found that legislators under term limits have been more frugal with our tax dollars. State government spending growth has been cut in half since term limits kicked in.
“Aside from ensuring incumbents cannot become career legislators, term limits also appear to have had an impact on controlling state spending,” the study concluded. “Between 2000 and 2006 — before term limits came into effect — spending increased an average of 4.43 percent annually, and in the 15 years between FY1991-1992 and FY2006-2007, spending increased an average of 5.03 percent. But since fiscal year 2007-2008 — when the first crop of legislators were affected by term limits — expenditures from the general fund have only increased an average of 2.08 percent annually, a more than 50 percent decrease in the spending growth rate.”
More here > http://www.platteinstitute.org/blog/detail/term-limits-and-fiscal-responsibility
A new study by the Platte Institute argues against Amendment 3 on this November’s ballot, finding that “incumbency provides a significant electoral advantage to sitting senators and stifles competition from challengers, issues that would be exacerbated by allowing incumbents to run for a third term.” The report also found that legislators under term limits have…
Read More
