The fast talking but slow thinking like to point out that America is not a democracy, it’s a republic.

Well, OK, but any self-respecting Greek would love to inform us “democracy” is a Greek word and translates to people power: “demos” (people) “kratos” (power). Since our seat of power rests with the voters and not with a King, nor in the hands of religious leaders, nor with the military (although the volatile and fully pardoned General Flynn advocated having the army seizing all the voting machines after Trump lost), we can still count ourselves as a democracy, like it or not.

As we approach our nation’s birthday, our democracy is under constant political pressure, often leading to lower participation rates in our elections and to weaker political institutions. Setting aside the disgrace we see at the national level: teams of fake electors vying to be illegally counted in the last presidential election, and a president openly soliciting additional votes from a state attorney general; on the local level, we have our own threats.

Please note there is a movement afoot to increase the length of the term of the town supervisor to four years from the current two-year term. We went through this before in the Town of Montgomery, during the Hayes Administration, and luckily the motion was defeated. Why would extending the term of the supervisor to four years be such an undemocratic move? I will explain.

The proponents of the change are going to make it sound so innocuous, so logical and so simple to accomplish. The town council seats, with which the supervisor serves, are four-year terms, so, why not the supervisor? Why should the supervisor have to run for the office every two years and waste all that time running for office? It takes too much energy to run for the office so frequently. That’s what they are going to say. And, perversely, they are going to argue for the supposed continuity the change will provide -- the ability to get things done!

Here’s the thing.

Not so much.

Two-year terms and two-year increments are fundamental to the American political system. The founding fathers believed in this staging of power. The entire House of Representatives is put up for an election every two years. The election of our Senate is spaced in such a manner that one third of all senate seats come up for reelection every two years. This time limitation is a part of our checks and balances. If you look at our town board, two seats come up for reelection every two years. This is significant. I will come back to this in a minute.

The ability to elect an entire new House of Representatives every two years is the most effective way to ensure the politicians haven’t lost all their marbles. If the country is going down a dangerous path, a change in leadership in the House puts an immediate check on the workings of the national seat of power. Aside from impeachment, for which most of us have become experts, it is the most immediate form of rebuke. It is the first line of change the loyal opposition (until recently, loyal) counts on to turn things around. If it is not too burdensome for congressmen and congresswomen to run for office every two years, it should not be so bad for our own supervisor to expose himself, or herself, for review every two years. Get out there and earn it.

As for the argument that a four-year term will help get projects done in a more timely and cohesive fashion, I just don’t see the connection. The local Republicans have had control of both the town board and supervisorship for quite some time, uninterrupted, and the police department is still working out of trailers, the Benedict Farm farmhouse remains a ruin with the back porch falling off and squirrels in the attic. Plus, the Benedict hayfields have not yielded any rent and have been given away free to one local farmer, as far as I can tell, for what? Four years now? The failure of the town board and former supervisor to understand the true value of Benedict Farm Park has led to the total collapse of the bobolink population of the park and to the loss of redwing blackbirds and numerous other grassland species, including a number of elusive sparrow species. None of this would have been prevented, or corrected, by a four-year term for supervisor. If good government on the local level is dependent on longer terms, why not make it six years?

The strongest argument against increasing the term of office to four years requires a smidgeon of math. But I know my readers can handle it.

As I mentioned before, the four town board members have four-year terms of office and they are staggered, so two board members come up for reelection, or election, every two years. The supervisor is also a voting board member, and with the supervisor voting that makes five voting members. That means three votes control the board’s actions. Three votes can pass a motion, three votes can defeat a motion.

A two-year term for the supervisor means the voters of the town can take control of the board at any time after a two-year period. A two-year term means the supervisor is ALWAYS running with two other council member votes. Consequently, three board votes are ALWAYS up for election, and the voters can change the way the board behaves on short notice -- every two years. This is not the case if the supervisor has a four-year term. Yeah, the voters could put in two new people, but that does ensure a swing in power. With the proposed change, the voters will not have a definitive check on the board until the fourth year. Instituting a four-year term for town supervisor will be a substantial diminishment of democratic prerogative at the local level.

Stand up against a change in the term of office for town supervisor. Keep it two years. Keep the power with the people.

PS. My latest trip to Benedict Farm Park revealed one nesting pair of bobolinks. This is a relief for the soul. Their habitat was turned upside down for four years. Monocultures of soybean and rye were planted before it was returned to grassland. The replacement hay now in the fields doesn’t look any better, from a commercial farming standpoint, than it did five summers ago. All that and no improvement, only the loss of habitat, species and rent.