Violating Our Rights as Citizens

On Sept. 26, New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani told the candidates who wish to succeed him that if they did not agree to let him stay in office an extra three months, he would seek re-election on the ticket of the Conservative Party. Michael R. Bloomberg, the Republican candidate, and Mark Green, one of the two Democratic candidates, announced that they would support extending Giuliani’s term. However, Fernando Ferrer, who will face Green in a Democratic runoff, said that he could not—not because he disapproves of Giuliani (he doesn’t), but because it goes against the principles for which our country stands.

Ferrer appears to be the only mayoral candidate and political figure who actually cares about the fact that we are a nation under law and should have faith in our democratic system. The voters of New York decided eight years ago to establish term limits for the mayor of New York City. Those term limits have not been altered in any form in the past and should not be now.

Leaders have come and gone, but the nation still prospers on the state as well as the federal level. The previous year’s debates over the presidential election are a perfect example. We were faced with a national crisis that—while in no way comparable to our present crisis—put our citizens at risk. For more than five weeks, we had no idea who would be our leader, but that did not persuade us to extend the current president’s term. This had nothing to do with the president himself, but because it violated what America stands for.

In those perplexing weeks, all we had were the words of our Constitution, the laws that we set up, and the Supreme Court. We had to have faith that it would all work out in the end. It eventually did, and with the inauguration of President George W. Bush, we moved our focus to other important issues facing the nation. New York should do the same.

New Yorkers are not so weak that they need the strength of one particular leader. Giuliani has done an exemplary job of leading New York City, particularly through this disaster. There is no doubt of that. However, to intimidate the present mayoral candidates into allowing him to extend his term is not the stuff of leadership. It is exploitation of power, and if Giuliani succeeds, it would set a precedent that would hurt not only New Yorkers but citizens of every state.

Instead, Giuliani should be putting his efforts into making sure the transfer of power is done effortlessly and smoothly, especially at a time like this. He should be working immediately with the mayoral candidates to bring them up to speed and to show them the mechanisms and workings of the mayor’s office. Giuliani should introduce them to members of his administration that he feels should stay on in order to finish the new projects they began as a result of the Sept. 11 attacks. In this way, when Giuliani leaves office, which should be on Jan. 1 and not April 1, the city of New York would be in good hands.

The mayor knows that he cannot pursue a third term because of the long process of undoing term-limit laws. Though some complain that term limits restrict voters’ choices, they have only become law where the people have voted to impose them. When given the chance to vote on term limits, Americans have voted in favor of them 42 times in 50 statewide referendums.

In 1993, Maine voters made history when they overwhelmingly approved a referendum to limit state representatives and senators to four consecutive terms. The only organized opposition came from legislators themselves. People have a right to restrict their choices, and with term limits they have done so deliberately and with the full understanding of the tradeoff it entails. In exchange for partially limiting their choices among candidates, they correctly believe that they are limiting also the accumulation of political power in the hands of a few.

It is a common argument among term-limit opponents that the restrictions turn out good, hardworking, popular incumbents like Guiliani along with the less likable legislators that term limits target. In truth, however, we cannot measure the number of good, talented people who never run for office and never have the opportunity to serve because they are locked out by the power of incumbency. However, there are several cases of term-limited members trying to stage a comeback by running against their replacements. In half of these cases, voters decided to stay with the new member, even though it is likely that without term limits the old member still would be in office.

If New Yorkers really wanted Giuliani to stay in office, there would have been a significant number of write-in votes for him during the primary on Sept. 25. There weren’t. New Yorkers voted for term limits voluntarily and should have the right to decide whether or not they want their mayor to stay in office longer, whether it’s for three months or for another four years. Apparently, Fernando Ferrer is the only one that comprehends this. For this reason alone, he has my absentee vote and, if you are a New Yorker, he should have yours as well.

Anat Maytal is a first-year in Thayer Hall.