There are some jobs you just can’t have forever.
In Pennsylvania, that’s written into law in some places and left entirely to voters in others. Governors are limited to two terms. That wasn’t always the case. It changed in 1967. Milton Shapp became the first to win a second term in 1974.
The same limits apply to lieutenant governor. Row offices, including attorney general, auditor general and treasurer, can serve only two consecutive four-year terms. Those aren’t a hard stop, however. Take a break for one election cycle, and you can run again.
Judges aren’t limited by terms — in part because of how they are elected. After 10 years, they face a retention vote. Win that just once, and you’re looking at 20 years on the bench. They are, however, limited in another way. Mandatory retirement comes at 75. Even senior judges must step down at 78.
State legislators have no such restrictions. If you were elected at 18 and lived to the ripe old age of 104, nothing would stop you from staying ensconced in Harrisburg the whole time. Michael O’Pake was Pennsylvania’s longest-serving lawmaker, spending 42 years in the House and Senate. Tony DeLuca represented the 32nd District for 39 years — and was even reelected a month after his death in 2022.
County leaders aren’t limited — or freed — by state laws. But that doesn’t mean they can’t be restricted. It just means the limits have to come from somewhere else. In Allegheny County, that “somewhere else” is the voters.
Council passed a measure this week that would place three questions on the ballot, limiting the county executive, council members and row officers to just three terms each — a total of 12 years.
For those already in office, the clock would start fresh, giving them a shot at an additional 12 years.
It was not a unanimous decision by council. It is not unexpected that those opposed are those who already have history in office, like Bob Palmosina, who is in his third term.
“If someone out there does a better job than me or feels that I’m not doing my job, then vote me out. We have elections for that reason,” he said.
He is not wrong. However, this position ignores a simple truth. Incumbents are more likely to be reelected not because anyone knows what they did but simply because of familiarity. Do people eat at McDonald’s because they like the food — or just because they recognize the sign?
Term limits don’t villainize long-serving elected officials. They may, in fact, encourage them to identify priorities and work faster to accomplish them instead of playing a long game. At the same time, they can open doors and encourage new involvement.
But if opponents really want to leave it up to the voters, they are in luck. That’s exactly what the proposed legislation is doing.
The question isn’t whether term limits are good or bad. It’s whether voters want to impose them.