'Term limits' suggest voters aren't smart

In his letter of April 29, David Ronske of Elmhurst tells us that Gov. Rauner advocated term limits during his campaign, but that since his election we have heard nothing from Gov. Rauner about term limits. May I say that I don't think term limits are necessary in the first place, and it is an offense to my intelligence to suggest that we need to have term limits.

In our democratic system of government, we have periodic elections, and at each election we may vote out of office any office holders that are not deserving of reelection. On the other hand, if certain elected officials are doing a great job, and we wish to continue to benefit from their experience for as long as we can, then we can vote to keep them in office for any number of terms.

I believe we voters are mature individuals, and we don't need to have limits placed on how long we can decide to have various elected officials remain in office. I can determine that matter every time I vote, and I can vote out those who are undeserving of further remaining in office, and I can vote to keep in office those who are doing a great job. The notion of term limits is in effect telling me that I'm not smart enough to vote out poor elected officials, but I do think I am smart enough to determine that every time I vote. So let us not impose term limits on our elected officials. We can keep them in, or throw them out, as we see fit.

Theodore M. Utchen

Wheaton