As a courtesy, here are the arguments for and against extending term limits:

Pro: Legislators need time to learn the ropes and develop the institutional knowledge and leadership skills to work effectively. Citizens deserve representatives who can do the best possible job.

Con: If these lawmakers are so ineffective, Maine shouldn’t keep them around any longer than necessary. The citizens of Maine voted for term limits, so their will should be respected.

Going further into this debate leads into a swamp of political gobbledygook. For 14 years, since term limits were enacted, its legislative impact starts great conversations at faculty tables and political science seminars.

For most everyone else, the topic is difficult to grasp. And understandably so.

Term limits are grand bogeymen for liberal government-watchers, who say they’ve entrenched the bureaucracy, created an inexperienced, partisan Legislature, harmed the development of complex policies, and failed to either diversify or improve the candidate pool.

These sentiments, however, are hard to quantify. Though yeoman’s work has been undertaken to study term limits in Maine, its impact is still more estimated than proven. Statistical data – such as a rising number of bills being submitted since term limits – is useful, but cannot be attributed to term limits alone.

For more conservative sorts, term limits have done their job: topple the rainmakers of legislative leadership, like the venerable Sen. John Martin. His decades-long run as speaker of the House through the 1970s and 1980s will never be repeated.

This is a quantifiable benefit from term limits, but again, not the complete measure of its impact.

Eventually, Maine will have to come to address its term limits fascination. Today, they are a convenient scapegoat for myriad legislative ills, which is why the proposal to extend them – from four terms to six – originated as a legislative proposal, not another citizen initiative.

We support the extension – a “yes” vote on Question 5 – to remove term limits as an excuse for legislative stumbling. By granting lawmakers these additional two terms, we expect them to make the most of it, and remedy the various complaints that today’s term limits have inspired.

In our view, two more terms is a slight alteration to the existing policy. Term limits remain, which means neither the 1993 intention of voters is disrespected, nor the spirit of the citizen initiative controverted by supporting this change.

This issue is complex and tricky. It was sent to voters for approval during the waning days of the last legislative session, and a measure of our support for Question 5 stems from trusting sentiments of lawmakers about their needs.

They say they’re right. But if not, the public shouldn’t wait for term limits to show its displeasure.