Last Thursday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced his intention to run for a third term, despite the current law limiting a New York City mayor to two terms. Bloomberg has been a well-liked mayor, and his financial acumen can serve the city well as it faces job losses and more damage from Wall Street's recent nosedive. Despite his credentials, however, it is essential that the democratic process be prioritized over Bloomberg's popularity.
Efforts are currently underway in the New York City Council to change the term limits on certain elected city offices, including those of the mayor and City Council members. This plan poses significant problems. First, it gives the council freedom to change not only the mayor's term limits, but also the term limits of its own members. This conflict of interest gives council members a power that could easily be abused, and certainly one that should not be given to individuals seeking to prolong their own stations. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D-West Midtown and Chelsea), once thought a future mayoral candidate herself, has changed her tune on term limits and shifted her power as speaker in favor of Bloomberg, telling media outlets she supported his latest initiative and adding that she would seek a third term on the council.
Moreover, elections alone are not proper means of controlling term limits. Long-standing incumbents often have an unfair advantage in their own parties, crowding out others who might have otherwise earned nominations. Finally, City Council should not allow for third terms against its constituents' wishes. People in New York City voted in favor of term limits twice in the 1990s, and recent polls cited by the New York Times say they still support them.
If New Yorkers have changed their minds on mayoral and City Council term limits, they should be able to say so themselves in a referendum. If not, City Council should not be able to change the law. We commend the efforts of City Council members Bill de Blasio (D-Park Slope and Carroll Gardens) and Letitia James (D-Fort Greene and Prospect Heights), who plan to introduce a bill calling for a referendum on term limits. Such a referendum is indispensable if officials running for third terms are to be afforded any legitimacy. According to the New York Times, only three mayors in the city's history have served three terms. The legitimizing of longer terms means fewer opportunities for change in the executive branch, and could herald stagnation if one person dominates city government for too long.
Bloomberg's popularity and deep pockets should not be the sole motive for altering mayoral term limits. Whether or not Bloomberg and the current council abuse their power in calling for a special third term, bending the rules for one candidate sets a precedent for future councils and mayors who may not have respectable intentions. Ultimately, the people should decide whether or not Bloomberg can run for mayor again. Ignoring the will of the people at any step in this process should not be an option.
Comments
We're looking for comments that are interesting and substantial. If your comments are excessively self-promotional or obnoxious you will be banned from commenting. Consult the comment FAQ and legal terms.