Propositions 2 & 3: Term limits: Limiting time serves public better

Elections are all about public trust. In 1992 and '93, borough voters trusted the election process and imposed term limits on the borough mayor, assembly and school board. In every case, voters overwhelmingly supported term limits. To see the history of term limits in this borough visit the Web site: www.ACT-KPB.org.

In 1999, six elected members of the assembly betrayed voters' trust by repealing term limits for assembly and school board before they took effect.

Having overturned the voters' wishes, some of those same politicians now say the 2007 term limit propositions are not legal. They claim term limits will be applied retroactively and are unconstitutional, but fail to quote any appropriate law.

Not only are they wrong, but even worse, they are intentionally misleading the public to advance their position.

As expected, those who oppose term limits are promoting confusion and uncertainty. Fact: propositions 2 and 3 passed legal review of both the borough's attorney and attorneys consulted by ACT. Bottom line, the Alaska State Constitution has no prohibition against term limits and there are no Alaska Supreme Court cases supporting the opponents' false claim.

The borough clerk even went so far as to misuse the term "retroactive" in what is supposed to be the "neutral" wording describing these propositions in the election guide. The truth is that term limits on the Oct. 2 ballot are not retroactive. They will take effect immediately, just like most laws passed by the assembly.

It should be noted that earlier this year the assembly was given multiple opportunities to draft an ordinance correcting the travesty committed against voters in 1999. Not one assembly member was willing to support that suggestion. Now they face an ordinance drafted by voters and appear to dislike that option even more.

If voters were instead being asked to re-institute another term limit proposition that would take effect in the future, would you trust the assembly not to repeal them, too? How can we ever trust career politicians who have repeatedly taken away our vote to advance their own agenda?

Term limits will level the playing field for those interested in public service. It takes time and money to run against an incumbent. Entrenched politicians have a distinct advantage, particularly when voter turnout is low. More members of the community should perform public service, not less, to insure that our government is truly an instrument of the people.

When no incumbent runs, or a seat is vacated, new people will run for that office. We see it this year in Homer, where Deb Germano vacated her seat, and again last year when Dan Chay decided not to run for a second term. By eliminating the power of incumbency, new people with fresh ideas are more likely to run for office.

Who will you trust in this election? Will it be your common sense or misleading words of career politicians? Support a more responsive, honest and truly representative borough government. Vote "Yes" on term limits Tuesday, Oct. 2.

Mike McBride is a member of the Alliance of Concerned Taxpayers board of directors.