Legislative term limits have been at the forefront of political discussions since Oklahoma became the first state to implement them in 1990.

Over the past 16 years, several other states, including California and Colorado, have also followed suit, and with the increasingly stagnant climate in Pennsylvania politics, it is time for the commonwealth to consider adopting such policies.

According to a March 19 Associated Press report, Pennsylvania's 253 legislators have one of the highest re-election rates in the country. And over the past decade, no more than five incumbents have lost in an election.

These statistics highlight one glaring problem: it is nearly impossible for a challenger to win election in Pennsylvania. To address this issue, voters should have the opportunity, via a referendum question, to decide whether term limits would be the appropriate solution.

Legislative term limits stimulate political competition, increase legislative diversity and ultimately give the public with a variety of options for representation. With respect to politics, providing voters with more choices increases the probability they will elect representatives that reflect their true preferences.

Chances are legislators would not enact such policies because they would limit the time they spend in office, but if the public supports the referendum, officials could not ignore the people.

But if the referendum is approved by a majority of voters, legislators should use caution when formulating term limit legislation. Several states, including Nebraska, which will lose about half of its legislature next year as a result of term limits, are just now feeling the negative ramifications of these laws.

Perhaps it would be in the best interest of both the voters and their representatives to implement limits barring legislators from serving more than three or four consecutive four-year terms so that the turnover is more staggered.