<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>LAist: LAist Guide to the Primary: Proposition 93</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2008/01/17/laist_guide_to_3.php</link>
<description>All comments for LAist Guide to the Primary: Proposition 93</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2008 la_jeremy</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:00:00 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>jeremy.oberstein@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>jeremy.oberstein@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>yad</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2008/01/17/laist_guide_to_3.php#comment-1273707</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2008/01/17/laist_guide_to_3.php#comment-1273707</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 10:26:02 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;I&apos;m confused...
It reduces term limits by two years but for most people already in office, it extends them.
So any benefits the &quot;pro&quot; claim of politicians staying in office longer (more experience, able to work on issues longer) are purely short term, right?    Eventually their 12 year mark will hit and anyone after that will have even less time to accumulate experience and work on issues.    What am I missing?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>