Professional Politicians Or Citizen Leaders?

       Gail Collins' op-ed in the NY Times today got me to thinking about something I've long thought to be our best cure for government, Term Limits. Our forefathers liked citizen leaders in government rather than professional politicians, but, as Gail pointed out, they all picked professional leaders. Still, they did all limit, or were limited, to short terms.
       I still believe that term limits are one of our best answers. There is the claim that Congressmen with limited terms would not be able to have clear understandings of complex issues. That's true, but then Congressmen with lengthy tours in office don't now understand most of the complex issues before them any more than many, many intelligent people in society. For most of the legislation that comes before our legislators, the staffs of these Congressmen are the ones who pour over it and then explain, briefly, to the Congressmen.
       So I guess, if you can follow the explanations of your staff and make a clear guess as to how to vote, almost anyone could do as well as our current crop. Perhaps even better since they wouldn't be forced to spend so much time trying to please their donor bases. And if you can't understand, sufficiently that staffer, fire him or her and hire a better one.
       The point I always come back to, is the time lost to courting donors and the obligations, real or imagined, to those same donors in order to insure reelection. That lost time would go far in allowing a better understanding of legislation, and without the need to please donors, a more fair and balanced decision might be forthcoming.
       So, while a professional politician may not be best for our country and government, the experience gained in lower level leadership positions in all facets of government will provide the needed insight to smoothly run our government. At least as well as is now the case.