House members can serve no more than three two-year terms. Capping the length of time state politicians can hold office has set off a debate about its effectiveness. Critics are quick to note that the limits are for life. Officeholders only get one shot at a position. Second, they contend, limited terms have the unintended consequence of further strengthening an unaccountable state bureaucracy that wields extraordinary influence on matters of public concern.
Supporters make equally convincing arguments.
They say, for example, that long-serving officeholders tend to use the power of incumbency to amass large war chests that insulate them from the threat of political newcomers. Perhaps there is a middle ground.