It was explained to me to limit the amount of time (or number of terms) an elected official can run will act as a disincentive for this person to take bribes or become too familiar with the system and thereby providing a confidence to bend the rules in their favor. I don’t disagree, but the rules should be clear and well policed. This fact that this is a concern shows a need for rule review.
The people need electors to rotate out. People need to serve one term (in rare exceptions two terms) and leave. The institutional memory should be the people, not specific legislators. Legislation should not be ambiguous and “Legislative Intent” should be clarified within the law. The need for judicial review can be remedied by the creation of clear legislation. This is a ploy by legislators to write deliberately obscure legislation. In many cases it allows them to show an effort to “fix a problem” when they know it will not be upheld by the courts. Citizens United comes to mind, but it happens all the time and at all levels of government. It is exacerbated by thousand page bills.
If people want term limits, vote out the incumbent. Further review will show, it is not the person but the policy push by the establishment (e.g. Republican or Democrat Party Leaders). The people need to demand a platform it can support. It needs to find people to champion these platforms, preferable outside of the existing establishment. Look at who is chosen to run. These folks in many cases are “retreads” from another election. The establishment will tell you name recognition is important, but with current connectivity, going viral is a daily occurrence. People are more interested in what a potential elector will support than prior victories.
There is a reason people voted for Obama (at least the first time) and Trump. They want change, they are disgusted with current policies. At some point, maybe, people will realize the road to these policy changes is through the Legislature, not the Executive Branch. People will find leaders to elect and these folks will be clear on the platform they support. This platform will either find support or be altered until it does. The people must decide what policies, what platform, they want and find leaders willing to carry the change to fruition, and then leave.
The goal is not to find lifetime legislators, but to find people willing to sacrifice for a few short years, help with platform fulfillment, explain government actions, ensure legislation is implemented correctly, mentor the new guy, and merge back into their old job.
If people are concerned about term limits, the focus should be on lifetime appointments. The government should never give anyone a job for life. It should be a finite appointment and barring a few exceptions (e.g. the Supremes should have 12 years, with a new one every two years), it should not be for very long. Other judgeships should be one and done. Judges have God like power over peoples’ lives, it must include oversight and a finite period to maintain objectiveness. The old saying absolute power corrupts absolutely comes to mind. Term limits are not the solution. The people need to vet and pick its electors and support them against conjured accusations. Until the current election path is changed, term limits will not limit the establishment’s control.