Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Constitutional Amendment Term Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee Rejects Constitutional Term‑Limit Change That Would Have Applied Statewide Offices
Summary
House Concurrent Resolution 30 34, which would have adjusted term limits for state offices, drew debate about timing and constitutionality. The committee issued a do‑not‑pass recommendation, with critics saying the measure should not proceed now while other ballot measures are pending.
House Concurrent Resolution 30 34, a proposed constitutional amendment that would change term‑limit rules for statewide offices, was discussed briefly in the House Government and Veterans Affairs Committee. Representative Greenberg offered an amendment to extend the maximum from eight to 12 years for the governor and lieutenant governor; the amendment failed on a committee vote.
Debate focused on consistency across statewide offices and on whether extending the governor’s allowable service would conflict with the goals of term‑limit proponents. Representative Eder said an eight‑year limit is common and appropriate because the governor’s office wields substantial appointment and policy power, while Representative Steiner and others argued former governors retain influence after leaving office.
The committee ultimately adopted a do‑not‑pass recommendation on the resolution, with members citing timing concerns and overlap with other proposed constitutional measures that could appear on ballots in the near term.
What happens next: The committee recommended a do‑not‑pass (motion carried 14‑0) and the resolution will not advance from this committee in its current form.
