I'd rather have a limit of 8 years, or preferably even 4, rather than the 12 in this bill, but at least it's a start at keeping some of these people from feeding at the public trough for their entire lives, at least in the legislature. How else are we going to get rid of some of these anti-rights, uh, people? Hawaii's citizens will no doubt elect people just as bad, but at least it'll be a new bad person and we won't have to listen to them for more than 12 years. I think it might be an improvement. Too bad recall isn't included in the bill. Edit: Although the language is rather ambiguous, it appears that a person could serve 12 consecutive years in the house and then immediately serve 12 years in the senate, and vice versa. Also, if the person takes a one term "hiatus" they can then start over. So what this "term limits" bill really is is a requirement for a 2 or 4 year vacation every 12 years. Does restricting a person to serving "only" 24 out of 26 consecutive years really qualify as "term limits"?

Testimony must be submitted by Tuesday, March 1, at 10 AM.

Go to the main page for the bill, and click on the blue "submit testimony" button on the upper right. You need to sign in, or create an account if you haven't already. They want everything registered: you, your guns, your car, etc. etc. etc., so they can keep track of just what we're up to. "Consent of the governed" and all that. 

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2753

SB 2753

PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III, SECTION 4, OF THE HAWAII STATE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH LEGISLATIVE TERM LIMITS.

Proposes a constitutional amendment to limit the terms of members of the legislature to a maximum of twelve consecutive years in the house of representatives and twelve consecutive years in the senate, for terms beginning on the day of the general election of 2020.

HAH.

Seems the "harassment" of my district senator is finally paying off 

DONE this needs doing!

This is one of the more important pieces of legislation; probably more important than any of the anti / pro gun bills in the legislature at the moment.

The only way we stop legislators from abusing their power is by controlling how much power they have, and this is one of two major steps; the other being recall.

If you support 2a, you should be supporting this.


Someone please get the word out to HRA and every other major pro-2a organization asap.

submitted my letter of support!!!

Submitted support but I see this as a two edged sword as Slom and Kong are limited and they are our biggest supporters.

Careful what you wish for in this State.

^^ I agree with this completely.  My thoughts exactly. 

For the left, having them cycle out 10 of 50 legislators in a state that regularly votes left is no big deal.  For the conservatives, a term limit for Sam Slom (or Gene Ward) means 100% removed of any voice in the Senate.

Submitted support but I see this as a two edged sword as Slom and Kong are limited and they are our biggest supporters.

Careful what you wish for in this State.

Excellent point.  Sort of like wanting an onerous SC justice to retire and then having them do it while democrats run things.

^^ I agree with this completely.  My thoughts exactly. 

For the left, having them cycle out 10 of 50 legislators in a state that regularly votes left is no big deal.  For the conservatives, a term limit for Sam Slom (or Gene Ward) means 100% removed of any voice in the Senate.

Submitted support but I see this as a two edged sword as Slom and Kong are limited and they are our biggest supporters.

Careful what you wish for in this State.

I'd miss the "good guys" too, but
1. If the people of a certain district are inclined to vote for legislators holding certain values and policy preferences, then those districts would likely continue to elect differently-named representatives holding similar values. If people are electing a "personality", at least partly independent of values, then I believe we have a problem more serious than lack of  "term limits".
2. I don't see house members being able to serve "only" 24 out of 26 consecutive years, nor a senate member being able to "only" serve 24 out of 28 years as serious, or even any, really, limitation on the ability of an individual to serve virtually as long as the people of that district want.
3. It won't pass with enough votes to be incorporated into the Hawaii state constitution. It needs a two thirds majority in each chamber, or majority passage in each chamber in each of two successive legislative sessions.
4. Even if it did pass, it wouldn't begin the "clock" until 2020. That means the first election where this bill, were it enacted this year, would possibly be effected is 2032. Unless the "term limits" are retroactive for prior to it's passage, and there is no mention of that in the bill.
5. No worries. It will be "business as usual" here in Hawaii for the foreseeable future.

Submitted support but I see this as a two edged sword as Slom and Kong are limited and they are our biggest supporters.

Careful what you wish for in this State.

So what's the alternative?

More people need to step up and consider public service (within the term limits).

Disappointing.

Legislation that could act as a stepping stone to policy that can make a real difference, and all we continue to hear are more excuses.

Don't get me wrong.  I support term limits.  Just need to be aware what the implications are for both sides.  In the long term, I believe this to be a good thing.

Don't get me wrong.  I support term limits.  Just need to be aware what the implications are for both sides.  In the long term, I believe this to be a good thing.

Slom and Kong aren't going to be there forever. What will everyone say when they do leave, or they are ousted by someone else?

By then, we still won't have any form of term limits and still no voter recall.

It will still be the same grab ass pony show that it is now, only worse.

We are in agreement... Kind of like what happened with Scalia. Who's next?

That's why adults of sound mind need to step up. Unless we have pro-2a people willing to step up, learn the rules and be part of the civic / legislative process, we will only have antis writing the rules. 

Some folks here have run for office (ex ShootingSportsHawaii).  Hopefully, more folks here would consider participating in their communities, whether condo board, neighborhood boards, boards and commissions, city council, legislature or executive branch.  Consider it civic duty.

It's a long term and continuous ongoing process.  Kind of similar to the forced "move up or move out every 2 years" system in the military, which keeps military personnel from getting stale and always improving.

Friday I wrote senate sponsors Ruderman and Thielen and co-sponsor Inouye the following email:

Could you please clarify SB 2753?

Under this provision could a legislator in one body serve 12 years, then immediately move to the other body and serve another 12 years? Or does the 12 consecutive year limit apply to any combination of time serving in either body altogether?

I'd really rather see a limit of 8 years, or really only 4 years. Is there any possibility of amending the bill to limit both the total time and the individual consecutive segments?

It doesn't seem to me that someone holding office for 24 out of 26 consecutive years (or 24 out of 28 per senate), as would be possible under your suggested amendment, really qualifies as "term limits" in any meaningful sense of the words.

I'd like to submit testimony on Monday, so if you could respond prior to that testimony submission deadline I could clarify my testimony on the issue.
* * * *
I just received this response from senator Thielen:

Most states with legislative term limits use 8 years. Senator Ruderman and I suggested 12 in our bill in the hope that would get the support of the majority of legislators. In the past term limit bills usually don't even get a hearing.

If most people agree to an 8 year limit, we'd support amending the bill. I don't know of any term limit of 4 years [Michigan has a 6 year term limit on house of representative members].

I suggest you write testimony in support of limits, and ask for an amendment to 8 years.
* * * *
Those submitting testimony could suggest the 8 year limit and see if that gets any traction.

She didn't really answer my questions about the details of how the limits work. I have to wonder why. The language is so vague maybe she doesn't know and it would be left up to courts to decide... but she did write the bill... so you'd think she'd know.