Addition of term-limits bit voters in end
To many Ohioans, this will be counter intuitive: But term-limits are one of the General Assembly’s biggest problems.
Sure, in theory, term-limits are great. Someone may only serve for eight consecutive years in the Ohio House or state Senate. Then, facing a term-limit, she or he either has to go back home or run for a seat in the legislature’s other chamber.
Say, for example, a state representative in Ohio reaches year eight of his or her tenure. That means returning to West Nowhere or running for a seat in the state Senate.
The same is true of a state senator reaching an eighth year in that chamber; time to leave Capitol Square for home — or seek an Ohio House seat or, or get a job from whomever happens to be governor. Given that there are three Ohio House districts for every
Senate district, we’re talking Rubik’s Cube-style career-planning.
We’re also talking endless Statehouse scheming — Sen. X scratches Rep. Y’s back, and vice-versa — to land another job or office, or a lobbying gig.
That means the legislative branch of Ohio’s government is short-term, even though it’s supposed to be a check and balance against the long-term parts of state government — Ohio’s executive bureaucracy and the Statehouse’s teeming business lobbies.
True, Ohioans overwhelmingly supported General Assembly term-limits when placed on the ballot in 1992 by conservative foes of 20-year Democratic House Speaker Vern Riffe, from Scioto County’s Wheelersburg. (Riffe retired when he wanted to — in December 1994.)
Term-limits on the legislature drew yes votes from 68% of those voting on it. That same day in 1992, voters also strongly backed term-limits on Ohio’s U.S. senators and U.S. representatives (though federal courts later overthrew those limits). And voters also placed term-limits on Ohio’s attorney general, auditor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state and treasurer. (Voters had already term-limited Ohio’s governorship in 1954 after Cleveland Democrat Frank Lausche kept winning it.)
No doubt it felt good for many voters when they kicked Statehouse incumbents in the shins in 1992, especially given what ended up being Democrats’ 22year rule of Ohio’s House. But reinventing the wheel every few years — which is what, in effect, a term-limited legislature does — is a colossal waste of time and leaves the permanent government untouched.
The connection to Larry Householder?
True, term-limits … modification … is something former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder, a Republican from Perry County’s Glenford, was aiming for. That’s why pruning or repealing Statehouse termlimits anytime soon is unlikely.
Householder, according to testimony in his federal corruption trial, now underway in Cincinnati, wanted to extend term-limits to a lifetime limit of 16 years, not
counting earlier terms; that way Householder could remain in Ohio’s House far longer than otherwise. (Householder is presumed innocent of the charges he’s facing — in connection with House Bill 6 of 2019-20, a Firstenergy Corp. nuclear power plant bailout — unless a jury convicts him.)
But if Ohio was supposed to reach new heights thanks to term-limits — you know, fresh legislative ideas, young blood, etc. — a voter should know this:
In 1992, when term-limits passed, Ohio’s per capita personal income was 95.09% of the comparable national figure; in 2021, nearly 30 years into termlimits, Ohio’s per capital personal income was 88.68% of national per capita. If a term-limited General Assembly was supposed to nudge Ohio closer to the Promised Land, somebody evidently lost the itinerary.
The budget
MEANWHILE: Ohio House committees are hard at it, holding hearing on the state budget that Republican Gov. Mike Dewine has proposed for the two years beginning July 1. Concurrently under review are separate transportation and workers’ compensation budgets.
Also in the mix is a proposed state income-tax cut, a Statehouse budget tradition. Part of this year’s tax cut plan would end a state subsidy, dating to 1971, called the property tax rollback. The rollback uses state money to cut the net cost of local property taxes paid by owners of residential property. Repealing it, unless carefully crafted, could stoke an uproar.
Thomas Suddes is a former legislative reporter with The Plain Dealer in Cleveland and writes from Ohio University. tsuddes@gmail.com