With that logic in mind, council member James Meyer is pushing to approve a proposal that would limit the number of consecutive terms he and his colleagues are allowed to serve to two. If the proposal is approved, council members would have to take two years off after reaching their term limit before being allowed to run again.

Meyer is really on to something here. Why didn't anyone think of this before?

Eight years is a long time. Check out a magazine or newspaper from 1991. Things that were going on eight years ago, such as the Persian Gulf War, now seem like ancient history. Did you know what e-mail was in 1991? Things have changed.

Council members and other officials are often voted into office year after year on name recognition, creating a pattern in which local politicians get too comfortable with their jobs. After three or four terms, they often lack the fire they had when they were the new kids on the block.

At the same time, after too many consecutive years on borough council, members can lose touch with their residents. When this happens, they could start following their own personal agendas rather than the public's wants and needs.

Perhaps spending two years as an ordinary resident could bring members back down to earth, making them better council members if and when they return.

Although three-plus term members were elected by the voters, having ineffective leadership on borough council is not in the best interest of the people council members are supposed to be serving.

Therefore, term limits are a necessary measure. They would assure that new ideas and voices from different people with different backgrounds can get their crack at attempting to make a better borough.

In addition, term limits give students a better chance of being elected to borough council. Groups such as the Keg Party would have a more level playing field on which to compete in an effort to make its voice heard.

Term limits don't limit choice. Rather, they prevent the limitation of new ideas in government.

What can be more democratic than that?