Rotation in office

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Term limits in the United States. (Discuss)

Rotation in office, or term limits, dates back to the American Revolution, and prior to that to the democracies and republics of antiquity. The council of 500 in ancient Athens rotated its entire membership annually, as did the ephorate in ancient Sparta. The ancient Roman Republic featured a system of elected magistrates -- tribunes of the plebs, aediles, quaestors, praetors, and consuls -- who served a single term of one year, with reelection to the same magistracy forbidden for ten years. See Cursus honorum

Many of the founders of the American Republic were educated in the classics, and quite familiar with rotation in office during antiquity. The debates of that day reveal a desire to study and profit from the object lessons offered by ancient democracy.

In June 1776, the continental congress appointed a committee of thirteen to examine forms of government for the impending union of the States. Among the proposals was that from the State of Virginia, written by Thomas Jefferson, urging a limitation of tenure, "to prevent every danger which might arise to American freedom by continuing too long in office the members of the Continental Congress...."^[1] The committee made recommendations, which as regards congressional term-limits were incorporated unchanged into the Articles of Confederation (1781-1789). The fifth Article stated that "no person shall be capable of being a delegate [to the continental congress] for more than three years in any term of six years."^[2]

The year 1776 saw rotation experiments also at the State level. Pennsylvania's new constitution (1776-1790) set maximum service in the state legislature at "four years in seven."^[3] Benjamin Franklin's influence is seen not only in that he chaired the constitutional convention which drafted the Pennsylvania constitution, but also because it included, virtually unchanged, Franklin's earlier proposals on executive rotation. Pennsylvania's plural executive was composed of twelve citizens elected for the term of three years, followed by a mandatory vacation of four years.^[4]

In contrast to the Articles of Confederation, the federal constitution Convention at Philadelphia omitted mandatory term-limits from the second national frame of government, i.e. the U.S. Constitution of 1787 to the present. Nonetheless, due largely to grass roots support for the principle of rotation, rapid turnover in Congress prevailed by extra-constitutional means. Also George Washington set the precedent for a two-term tradition that prevailed (with the exception of FDR's four terms) until the 22nd Amendment of 1951.

However, when the states ratified the Constitution (1787-88), several leading statesmen regarded the lack of mandatory limits to tenure as a dangerous defect, especially, they thought, as regards the Presidency and the Senate. Richard Henry Lee viewed the absence of legal limits to tenure, together with certain other features of the Constitution, as "most highly and dangerously oligarchic."^[5] Both Jefferson^[6] and George Mason^[7] advised limits on reelection to the Senate and to the Presidency, because said Mason, "nothing is so essential to the preservation of a Republican government as a periodic rotation." The historian Mercy Otis Warren, warned that "there is no provision for a rotation, nor anything to prevent the perpetuity of office in the same hands for life; which by a little well timed bribery, will probably be done...."^[8]

The fact that "perpetuity in office" was not approached until the 20th century is due in part to the influence of rotation in office as a popular 19th century concept. "Ideas are, in truth, forces," and rotation in office enjoyed such normative support, especially at the local level, that it altered political reality.^[9] For a detailed study of the 19th century concepts of rotation let the reader consult Political Science Quarterly, vol. 94, "House Turnover and the Principle of Rotation," by Robert Struble, Jr. See also James Young's The Washington Community, 1800-1828.

According to Young, the tendency to look with mistrust upon political power was so ingrained into American culture that even the officeholders themselves perceived their occupations in a disparaging light.^[10] James Fennimore Cooper, the novelist, described the common view that "contact with the affairs of state is one of the most corrupting of the influences to which men are exposed."^[11] An article in the Richmond Enquirer (1822) noted that the "long cherished" principle of rotation in office had been impressed on the republican mind "by a kind of intuitive impulse, unassailable to argument or authority."^[12]

Beginning about the 1830's, the Jacksonian Revolution introduced a less idealistic twist to the practice of limiting terms. Rotation in office came to mean taking turns in the distribution of political prizes.^[13] Rotation of nominations to the U.S. House of Representatives – the prizes – became a key element of payoffs to the party faithful. The leading lights in the local party machinery came to regard a nomination for the House as "salary" for political services rendered. A new code of political ethics evolved, based on the proposition that "turnabout is fair play."^[14] In short, rotation of nominations was intertwined with the spoils system.

In district nominating conventions local leaders could negotiate and enforce agreements to pass the nominations around among themselves. Abraham Lincoln was elected to the House in 1846 under such a bargain, and he returned home to Springfield after a single congressional term because, he wrote, "to enter myself as a competitor of another, or to authorize anyone so to enter me, is what my word and honor forbid."^[15]

The practice of nomination rotation for the House of Representatives began to decline after the Civil War. It took a generation or so before the direct primary system, civil service reforms, and the ethic of professionalism worked to eliminate rotation in office as a common political practice. By the turn of the 20th century the era of incumbency was coming into full swing.

After WW II, however, an officeholder class had developed to the point that congressional tenure rivaled that of the U.S. Supreme Court, where tenure is for life. Homesteading in Congress, made possible by reelection rates that approached 100% by the end of the 20th century, brought about a popular insurgency known as the term-limits movement. The elections of 1990-94 saw the adoption of term limits for state legislatures in almost every state where citizens had the power of the initiative. In addition 23 states limited service in their delegation to Congress, with the general formula being three terms [six years] in the U.S. House and two terms [twelve years] in the U.S. Senate.

As they pertain to Congress, these laws are no longer enforceable, however, as a result of lawsuits filed by term limits foes including ousted Speaker of the House, Tom Foley. In 1995 the U.S. Supreme Court overturned congressional term limits,^[16] voiding throughout the nation, an original principle of the American Revolution.

Where rotation in the legislative branch has withstood court challenges, term limits continue to garner popular support. As of 2002 "U.S. Term Limits" found that in the 17 states where state legislators served in rotation, public support for term limits ranged from 60 to 78 percent.^[17]

[edit] References

1. ^ Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Julian F. Boyd, et.al., (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1950-), 1:411.
2. ^ Also, article IX, paragraph 5, of the Articles of Confederation provided that, "no person be allowed to serve in the office of president more than one year in any term of three years."
3. ^ Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, section 8.
4. ^ Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, section 19. On Franklin's plan of 1775 see, Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed., Albert Henry Smyth, 10 vols. (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1907), 6:423, article 9.
5. ^ R.H. Lee, Letter to Edmund Randolph dated 16 October 1787, in Richard Henry Lee, The Letters of Richard Henry Lee, ed. James C. Ballagh, 2 vols. (New York: Macmillan Co., 1911), 2:450, 455. See also 1:191, letter to Edmund Pendleton dated 12 May 1776, and Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, ed. Walter H. Bennett (University, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press, 1978), pp. 72-75, 86.
6. ^ Jefferson, Papers, Boyd, ed., 12:440, 13:490. See also 15:25 for Jefferson's definition of rotation in office.
7. ^ Mason in Jonathan Eliot, ed., The Debates in the Several State Conventions on Adoption of the Federal Constitution, 5 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1836), 3:485.
8. ^ Mercy Otis Warren, Observations on the new Constitution, and on the Federal and State Conventions 9, in Herbert J. Staring, ed., The Complete Anti-Federalist, 6 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981) 4:270, 278.
9. ^ Robert Struble, Jr., "House Turnover and the Principle of Rotation," Political Science Quarterly 94 (Winter 1979-80): p. 650, and fn. 6. The quotation is from Henry James, the biographer.
10. ^ James S. Young, The Washington Community, 1800-1828 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1966), pp. 51-52, 55-57, 59-61, 64, 145.
11. ^ James Fenimore Cooper, The American Democrat (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1931), p. 52;
12. ^ Richmond Enquirer, 8 November 1822, p. 3; Struble, supra., p. 653.
13. ^ One can still detect the idealism of the Revolutionary period echoed by President Andrew Jackson in his address to Congress, 8 December 1829: "There are, perhaps, few men who can for any great length of time enjoy office and power without being more or less under the influence of feelings unfavorable to the faithful discharge of their public duties. Their integrity may be proof against improper considerations immediately addressed to themselves, but they are apt to acquire a habit of looking with indifference upon the public interests and of tolerating conduct from which an unpracticed man would revolt. Office is considered as a species of property, and government rather as a means of promoting individual interests than as an instrument created solely for the service of the people. Corruption in some and in others a perversion of correct feelings and principles divert government from its legitimate ends and make it an engine for the support of the few at the expense of the many."... [James D. Richardson, ed., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1896-99), 2:448-49].
14. ^ Struble, supra, pp. 661-62.
15. ^ Struble, ibid, pp. 659-60; Lincoln's letter to William Herndon, 8 January 1848, in Abraham Lincoln, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, ed. Roy P. Basler, 10 vols. (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1953), 1:430-31.
16. ^ U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton. The decision was 5-4.
17. ^ Stacie Rumenap, “Career Politicians Never Did Like Term Limits,” No Uncertain Terms, August 2002, vol. 10, #7, pp. 2-3.

[edit] See also