David Bryan Rowlett

There is a chronic problem with politics. It’s the power of the incumbent. Once someone is elected to office, the chances of the candidate being unseated by a challenger decreases with each successful reelection. The consensus is, that this often leads to complacency, to laziness, and even to graft.

So an increasing number of states have instituted term limits: so many terms in office, and you can’t stand for reelection. Recurrent efforts at instituting these limits at the Federal level have failed, with the exception of the Oval Office. After FDR, presidents have been limited to two terms.

Some of the pundits are very concerned about this movement. The conservative thinker Burke argued that politics is a skill like any other. Just as you would not want an inexperienced surgeon operating on you or your family, so you would not want a novice elected official deciding on far-reaching laws and policy. Every newly elected official will say that the job is far more complicated than they imagine, and that most of the first first term is consumed by simply ‘learning the ropes’. Real mastery of the process can take a decade or more.

Currently in Louisiana, our own term limits have just started kicking in, producing a madhouse turnover of the legislative branch, and a loss of all real seniority. The consensus among the pundits is that the winners here will be the lobbyists: they are the only ones left with any long-term experience in state policy. Shifting from incumbent to lobbyists, somehow, does not seem to be what reformers were aiming for.

Another problem is the nasty partisanship we see. The infighting has reached levels not seen for decades, to the point that effective governance has become a side-show, a secondary concern. Everyone is so busy trying to make the other guy wrong, that no one knows what is right anymore. At a point that the Soviet Union no longer divides the world, at a time that America could be leading the world in fighting oppression and suffering, we are simply fighting with each other instead.

I have an idea about how we might kill two birds with one stone: Extendible Limits. After a candidate has served the maximum years allowed by law, a vote of the governing body– by private ballot– in which he has served might allow him to stand for re-election: a simple majority would be required for the first post-limit election, and with each successive election bid an increasingly higher required majority would be required: 53%, 56%, etc.

For the chief officer, perhaps the House and the Senate would both have to grant permission.

This has some very positive outcomes. Backbiting is punished, cooperation is rewarded. Politicians have to decide if they want to play hardball and settle for a few quick wins and then leave; or if they wish to really work at governance, at collaboration, and at consensus-building. I suspect the best and the brightest will choose the latter.

And the Good ol’ boys will find quickly find themselves in the political unemployment line. The damage they cause will be very limited.

The elected officials who have the wisdom and the patience to build our country– and our world– will see their political strength increase rapidly. And all of them, the length of their service, and the height of their influence, will correlate directly with the effort, passion, and intelligence they bring to the job.

Once and future blogger Artus Register has launched a new site focusing on pro-freedom action. The libertarian activist insists, however, that this new project is something completely different, and is much more than just another blog wherein the freedom-minded simply complain to each other.

“This is all about action, and that’s the part we’ve been missing,” Register says.

While many new sites and educational/action groups committed to liberty have popped up since the success of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign, Register says this organization, Liberty’s Torch is completely different.

One huge difference is the top to bottom management, which is a sort of 3 level hierarchy containing libertarian worker ants, state and local coordinators, and project leaders. The first goal, we hear often, is to “change the conversation.”

Among the site’s out-of-the-gate projects are defeating the big three bailout, educating Americans about jury nullification, and immediately ending the Iraq war. Such lofty goals are assisted by the second major difference LibertysTorch.com enjoys-something Mr. Register calls conjunctive effort.

“The state isn’t the only enemy of liberty. Our own bigotry hurts us as much as anything.

“Gun rights supporters think pot smokers are the devil’s henchmen, and gays are Satan himself. Inversely, many civil libertarians think all gun guys are survivalist Klansmen in secret militias who want to Lavay government buildings. People whose rights are being destroyed by a leviathan government need to stand together and fight back.”

Through this conjunctive effort, Liberty’s Torch plans to reach out to any group who agrees with them on the issue at hand, regardless of the groups other views.

“A large group of people clearly has a much better chance of slaying a beast, than just a few people.”

Liberty’s Torch is currently seeking writers, planners, and directors and grunts for organization, motivation, recruiting, fund raising, letter writing, phone call campaigns, etc. Those interested are asked to contact Liberty’s Torch at resisters@libertystorch.com.

You gotta’ give it to John McCain. He knows how to throw the dice. Just a couple of months ago McCain completely won over the Republican base with a very risky move-choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I remember the day of the announcement. Conservative journalists shouted for joy. His was a choice that they liked.

And the public responded as well. There even came a point where McCain was leading in the polls. I couldn’t believe it. I actually thought that the impossible was going to happen. I actually thought John McCain might win this thing. Even after 8 years with a Republican president with a dismal public opinion rating.

It seemed like Palin was a great choice. While her political experience was minor compared to other candidates, she was the governor of Alaska. She was attractive, smart, and down-to-earth. Of course, the media immediately pounced, ripping every aspect of her life to shreds as is it’s policy for high profile candidate. But she stood up to it.

But then the bubble burst. Suddenly voters were no longer enamored with this seemingly attractive running mate. She stopped looking down to earth and started to look nave and much too inexperienced.

I feel that Palin came across too much like President Bush. Remember that America elected George Bush to be president twice. We liked him. We knew that there were certainly more intelligent and experiences choices out there, but we liked him. We liked Sarah Palin as well, and this has made us scared of her.

We’ve seen first hand the consequences of voting for someone that you like. And we need a president who won’t just go with his gut. McCain showed that he’s capable of making unwise, risky calls.

America should have a president who plays it safe. We’re a nation with too many problems. We need a president who will make not just bold decisions, but smart decisions. McCain’s call showed us that he shouldn’t be our president.