Oregonians will have a second chance to decide how long politicians can serve in the Oregon Legislature come November because of a measure aimed at restoring a law overturned four years ago.
Measure 45 amends the Oregon Constitution to limit state legislators to only six years of service as a representative, eight years as a senator and a total of 14 years in the Legislature. The measure would apply to current incumbents by counting their previous service in the Legislature.
The current state law does not limit length of service in the Legislature as a representative or a senator.
Oregon voters approved a term limits bill in 1992 by more than one million votes, but the Oregon Supreme Court overturned the law in 2002.
State legislatures in 15 states already have term limits, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Campaign spokesman Paul Farago and Lynn Lundquist, president of the Oregon Business Association and former Republican representative to the Oregon House of Representatives, debated the merits of the measure at a City Club of Eugene debate Friday.
Farago said the measure puts a check on unlimited government power by allowing new people to run for the Legislature. Term limits would make Oregon politics more “functional, more representative and more interesting for people to participate in,” he said.
Farago said the intent isn’t to get rid of career politicians but to level the playing field against them by allowing all Oregonians to serve.
“Give the voters a chance and we will see that Oregonians can step up to the plate and serve in the Legislature, just like these career politicians are able to do,” Farago said.
Lundquist said few legislators serve more than three terms in the Legislature, but term limits take away a voter’s right to choose the best candidate by forcing experienced legislators to leave office even if they are still effective and knowledgeable.
The principle won’t work in business when the success of a company depends on its knowledge base, and it won’t work in politics, he said.
“When I was in my first term, I knew a whole lot less about the process then I did in my third term,” Lundquist said. “Why should we take that knowledge and throw it to the wind?”
Lundquist said that elections, not term limits, are the best way to deal with politicians.
“If you don’t like your legislator, get rid of him,” Lundquist said.
Farago and Lundquist disagreed about the effect of term limits during the years that they were in place.
Farago said when Oregon had term limits, the senior legislators had less power and the junior legislators were given more of a voice in public policy. The diversity of the Legislature also increased, with the percentage of women in the Legislature peaking at 35 percent, he said.
Farago said when term limits originally passed, the “hostility of the insiders existed from day one” and that the legislators worked to overturn the law despite the support of most Oregonians.
“We need a government that is going to start respecting the existing laws,” Farago said. “We can do that if we put citizens in there along with the politicians, and that is what term limits will do.”
Lundquist, who served in the Legislature when term limits took effect, said Democrats and Republicans worked better when they had experience and the time to understand the political process. After term limits were put in place, several experienced legislators left and the work sessions were not as productive, he said.
Farago and Lundquist also sparred over how term limits affect the influence of lobbyists.
Term limits break up the relationships between lobbyists and politicians in the Legislature, Farago said.
Lundquist said that lobbyists serve a purpose in the Legislature and that he works as a lobbyist because he believes he is working for good policy in Oregon. However, term limits would put lobbyists in charge because they would have more sway on first-time legislators than they would with senior legislators, he said.
Contact the city, state politics reporter at [email protected]