Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Term Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delegate Vogel urges 16-year constitutional term limit, witnesses split
Summary
Delegate Vogel presented HB 1099 proposing a constitutional amendment to limit service in Maryland ssembly to 16 years starting after the 2030 election; witnesses exchanged sharply different views about institutional knowledge and democratic accountability.
Delegate Vogel presented House Bill 1099, a proposed constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of the Maryland General Assembly, telling the Rules and Executive Nominations Committee the measure would take effect after the 2030 election and would grandfather current legislators.
"This bill is drafted to enact term limits for legislators starting in 2030," Vogel said, explaining the measure would set a four-term (16-year) limit irrespective of chamber and send the amendment to voters via referendum. Vogel emphasized the delayed start so long‑serving members would not be immediately displaced.
Bruce Bariano testified in opposition, saying term limits would "undercut" the legislature by removing institutional knowledge and maturity that members build over time. "To blanketly tell all the legislators you can only serve for a short period of time, you are weakening very respectfully the structure, the knowledge, the experience," he said, urging an unfavorable report.
Lee Bradshaw, testifying for the Maryland Forward Party, said 16 years "strikes an appropriate balance" between citizen governance and experience, arguing turnover prevents bureaucratic capture and keeps new leaders emerging.
The bill sponsor framed the proposal as responsive to constituents who favor limits but sought to avoid immediate loss of experienced legislators by delaying implementation and grandfathering current members. No committee questions were raised during the presentation and the public hearing concluded without a recorded committee vote on HB 1099.
What happens next: HB 1099 remains under consideration by the committee; the sponsor urged a favorable report to move the constitutional question to a voter referendum.
