With Them On Term Limits
By Discussing the Possibility
Of Reversing Two Referenda
Hurricane Gustav and mass evacuation, the truncated Republican convention, and the vice presidential nominee’s impending grandchild have dominated the news cycle for the past few days, with New York City relatively out of the limelight.
The issue of term limits, which we wrote about Thursday and Friday, continues however to lumber along. Mayor Bloomberg said several weeks ago that his support for term limits, a position he has held vocally and repeatedly for seven years, was no longer operational. As the days of his second term (now 485) dwindle, the prospect of a third term, which he had previously strongly rejected, began to tantalize him. With the Presidency and the Vice Presidency, targets of his 2007 experimentation, now unavailable, it is not unreasonable for the Mayor to turn his attention back to what was called by David Garth forty years ago "the second toughest job in America."
READ MORE...
Hi Henry
ReplyDeleteEvidently, in the opinion of our Mayor and his inner circle, people's votes only count when they support Mayor B. Term limits looked great to them seven years ago, but not now that there is only a year left to Bloomberg's legal term of office. Instead of spending another $73 million dollars to win the 2009 election, the Mayor might consider donating the money to the cash-starved MTA for vitally needed service fixes. (He didn't think the City could afford it, but he didn't say HE couldn't.)
Only an extraordinary circumstance could justify overturning the people's will. Even 9/11 did not. So maybe the Real Estate lobby will just have to live with the probability that our next mayor, whoever it is, will be less amenable to giving them a free hand to rezone the entire city for luxury residential development.
They should realize that in any event nobody loses all the time. Term limits at least would protect the value of Manhattan's skyscrapers, since our next mayor, being a mere mortal, would probably consult engineering experts before putting windmills on rooftops.
The birds will certainly be pleased.
Arthur
I am against term-limits. Although incumbency provides a very distinct advantage, term limits should be decided by the voters who may wish to "retire" their rep. and not re-elect him/her. Incidentally, Tammany had term limits: They were called judgeships! Term limits creates musical political chairs with a loss of expertise by incumbents and an expensive cost for the City's Board of Elections (but that's the price of democracy). If there be a change in the law--voted on by hoi polloi, then it must not apply to current office holders. -- s/Alan Flacks
ReplyDelete