Proposed term limits change sparks little debate

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Imposing term limits on members of the General Assembly was a hot-button election issue a decade ago. This year a proposal to slightly loosen the restriction is causing little controversy.

Amendment 3, which appears on the Nov. 5 ballot, would provide a limited exemption to the state's constitutional cap of eight years of service per legislative chamber.

Missouri Term Limits, which successfully pushed for restrictions on legislative service in 1992, is taking no position on Amendment 3. Even the lawmaker who sponsored the legislation putting the measure on the ballot isn't attempting to sell the change to voters.

At issue is whether a partial term to fill a vacancy should count toward the 8-year cap, as it does now. The sponsor of Amendment 3, state Sen. Sidney Johnson, D-Agency, said his proposal is a simple technical fix.

"I'm sure voters didn't intend for a person to serve less than eight years," Johnson said.

"In many cases, that is what happens. What I'm trying to do is correct that."

Under the present term limits provision, for example, a person elected to serve the final year of a four-year Senate term is eligible for one full term and forced out after only five years. A representative who fills the last year of a two-year term has to leave after seven years.

Amendment 3 would exempt partial terms of less than half of a full term from counting against the cap. In that narrow scenario, a senator could serve a maximum of just under 10 years and a representative could serve just under nine years.

Current lawmakers would not qualify for the exemption. It would also only apply to a lawmaker's first term in office, meaning a previously term-limited veteran could not return to fill a vacancy.

Greg Upchurch, a St. Louis attorney and spokesman for Missouri Term Limits, said Amendment 3 is in line with provisions of the state and federal constitutions that allow a governor and president who fills a vacancy to serve two more full terms.

Although his group has fought efforts in the Missouri legislature to weaken term limits since voters adopted them by a 3-to-1 margin in 1992, Upchurch said it is staying neutral on the current proposal.

"If we see something we consider a real threat, we don't hesitate to make a big deal out of it," Upchurch said.

"We don't see this as a threat."

From 1990 through 2000, 21 states enacted some form of legislative term limits, but only 17 still have them. Courts invalidated limits in Massachusetts, Washington and Oregon. Idaho lawmakers repealed that state's voter-approved term-limits law earlier this year.

In addition to Idaho, modifications or repeals of term limits were considered in nine other states. Most died for lack of legislative approval. In March, California voters rejected a proposal to extend term limits.

mpowers@semissourian.com

(573) 635-4608