I've long supported a one-term limit for every elected office in America because this would at least limit a corrupt incumbent's time in office; one term and you're gone.
Virginia's governor and the president are limited but not congressional, General Assembly, supervisory board or council members, or mayors.
Corruption takes time; likely more than one term, thus, multi-term incumbents are more likely to be corrupt than one-termers.
Even council and supervisory board members agree that congressional and General Assembly members are corrupt, but claim themselves to be honorable. But are they?
Mount Jackson Town Council members are opposed to a one-term limit for council members and mayor, especially Ordinance Committee Chairman Todd Holtzman, but none have a valid reason why.
Any incumbent who opposes a one-term-limit doesn't have the taxpayers' best interests in mind, thus, doesn't deserve to occupy their seat.
But, there's a logical solution. Holtzman should place the one-term limit issue on the ballot and let the voters decide. That's the Democratic way.
Why hasn't District 2 Supervisor Steve Baker proposed a one-term limit to his fellow board members to discuss and approve or place the issue on the ballot so that voters can decide?
Former Gov. Bob McDonnell couldn't seek re-election because of one-term limit, but, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was re-elected to four more years because New Jersey doesn't have one-term limit.
One-term limit is the only avenue "we, the people" have to protect ourselves from multi-term corrupt incumbents.
If elected mayor or to council in May's town election, my thrust will be one-term limit and tax revenue structure changes that will benefit the town's taxpaying residents.
I'm open to a public debate versus incumbent(s) seeking re-election or new candidates, and if they don't have the "backbone" to face me in a public debate, then they should not place their names on the ballet.
Al Asbury, Mount Jackson