As my cousin recently told me, "We already have a term limit mechanism in place. It's called an election." If voters are dissatisfied with their representatives, they should reject them at the polls. Term limit laws, in any form, deprive voters of even those leaders who have proved themselves worthy of re-election.
Contrary to his claims, Perot's proposal might not provide an incentive for legislators to cut the deficit. Because it would punish all members of Congress-even those who have done all in their power to reduce spending-there would be little political reward in trying.
5. Having rightfully criticized proposals for a balanced budget amendment, is Perot's recent embrace of the proposal more empty symbolism?
The amendment proposal is a gimmick, and Perot correctly said so during the presidential campaign. Like term limitation laws, it assumes that an amendment will change the behavior of legislators who do not currently vote for reduced spending.
Perot well knows that politicians and bureaucrats will turn to accounting tricks and "off-budget" spending to meet the requirements of a balanced budget amendment. In his Sunday address he said, "We must eliminate all the Government's accounting tricks." But saying it will not make it so, and Perot would be the last person to suggest a way of accomplishing this Herculean task.
6. As a proponent of openness and honesty, should Perot abandon the secrecy that has surrounded his organization?
He has refused to reveal the intended goals or activities of United We Stand, and he not disclosed the results of his recruiting efforts. As an entrepeneur, Perot should know better than to ask people for $15 to become members of his organization when he refuses to say what exactly they will be purchasing.
7. Since Ross Perot is evidently here to stay, should be at least fulfill his promise to disseminate truth instead of carelessly embracing falsehoods and distortions?
Perot's tendency to resort to vague rhetoric allows him to get away with misstatements that are only rarely challenged publicity. For example, during his congressional testimony he ludicrously asserted that no one in Clinton's administration "has ever run a business or created a job, far as I know."
Perot should follow the advice of the Sen. Harry Reid (D.Nev.), whose anger at this comment prompted him to respond, "I think you should start checking your facts a little more, and stop listening to the applause so much."
Perot has shown that he is in a position to be heard and even respected by many people. With this opportunity for ego-stroking comes the responsibility to be honest.
Perot would best serve democracy by following his own advice to "call a dog a dog and an elephant an elephant." That means he should admit that Sunday night's Ross Perot Show was not an attempt to gauge public opinion, but a cynical and egoistic effort to manipulate it.
Perot's national referendum' mocks the democratic process the claims to promote
His stature gives Perot an opportunity for ego-stroking and a responsibility to be honest.