Rep. Claire Snyder-Hall argues that term limits are anti-democratic, but that framing overlooks why so many Delawareans support them. Term limits do not take power away from voters; they ensure voters regularly have meaningful choices. When incumbents hold office for decades, elections often become formalities, not contests of ideas.
Yes, voters can technically remove long-serving officials. In practice, entrenched advantages – name recognition, fundraising networks and party backing – make it extraordinarily difficult for challengers to compete. Term limits level the playing field, encourage competition and reduce the concentration of power that comes with career politicians.
Experience matters, but so does responsiveness. Fresh perspectives bring innovation, energy and a closer connection to today’s challenges. Delaware’s proposed constitutional amendment strikes a reasonable balance, allowing ample time for public service while preventing indefinite tenure.
Calling term limits anti-democratic ignores the reality that democracy thrives on renewal. Many Delawareans are not seeking to punish public servants; they want a system that invites new leaders and ideas. Term limits simply reflect that desire for accountability, balance and a government that evolves with the people it serves.




















































