I just got back from Wyoming, where politicians are working overtime to overturn term limits. I came away with a sense of deja vu.

Though the faces change, the arguments don’t. Take the most common objection: Why limit the rights of voters to vote for whomever they want? The Wyoming rep who filed the lawsuit against term limits argued that. He said it is “unconstitutional” to take away voters’ rights “to decide who serves them and how long.” And yet it was the voters themselves who overwhelmingly voted to put in term limits, by 77 percent!

The voters understand the difference between choosing one candidate over another and applying a general rule about how long candidates good or bad should serve. It’s not personal for them. It’s a recognition of the complexity of choice. But “complexity” is a fighting word for Wyoming’s Secretary of State Joe Meyer, who asserts the world is more complex than in decades past. Only with extended terms, he thinks, can legislators gain the knowledge they need. “You’re getting rid of someone with twelve years of experience and replacing them with someone who can’t find the bathroom.”

The world has always been complex. Even serving fifty consecutive life terms in office won’t give you the knowledge to do some things. That’s why we limit governments as well as terms. And if the legislative process seems complex, that’s because old timers in power want it that way. Limit the terms, and watch politics get a bit simpler. As for bathrooms, draw a map.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.