Why Virginia’s one-term limit for governors deserves a second look

As we enter 2026, it’s time to remember why Virginia is exceptional.

And by that, I am not referring to the fact that the commonwealth holds the record for most times ranked No. 1 on CNBC’s Top States for Business or our status as “the mother of presidents,” producing eight of the 45 men who have served as the nation’s commander-in-chief.

Instead, I’m talking about Virginia being the sole state to impose a one-term limit on its governor. With the Old Dominion prepared to swear in our historic first woman governor on Jan. 17 (read our exclusive interview with Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger), it’s a good time to revisit this topic.

While the changing of administrations in Virginia state government hasn’t been as chaotic (or even traumatic) as what we’ve seen on the federal level in recent years, it’s also not inconsequential. As a former state government employee and legislative liaison who served during four gubernatorial administrations, I witnessed firsthand how priorities could change dramatically and initiatives could get discarded or added between administrations, even between governors of the same political party.

Each comes in with a need to reward supporters, so there is often turnover among political appointees such as secretaries, deputy secretaries and agency heads. This means possibly losing continuity of leadership or expertise and can also translate into much shorter-term thinking, with an administrative emphasis on quicker goals that can be achieved before a governor leaves office — and may subsequently need to tout for a Senate or presidential bid.

Even when an administration does set longer-term goals, if they don’t get active buy-in, initiatives can be deliberately “slow-walked” by veteran state employees who know they’ll outlast this administration,
just as they have before. I’ve seen that happen too. (For the record, philosophically, I always took the stance that as a state worker, it was not my place to judge or set policy. It was my duty to carry out the directions of the administration and the legislature while providing the best counsel and expertise I could.)

All of this is to say that a one-term limit may not be the best strategy for continuity of leadership and fostering long-term thinking, not to mention economic development competition with neighboring states.

While the Virginia Economic Development Partnership and our local governments employ plenty of talented experts who do a fine job in attracting and retaining business, there is something to be said for relationship-building with a state governor or Cabinet members that could last longer than four years.
We are fortunate to have enjoyed the leadership of very capable governors from both sides of the aisle, most of whom have understood the value of building on successes from prior administrations — sometimes going as far as to retain secretaries appointed under governors from the opposing political party.

But there’s also no guarantee that Gov. Spanberger, a Democrat, might place the same emphasis on economic development initiatives that were important to her GOP predecessor, Gov. Glenn Youngkin. (Read our exit interview with Youngkin.) That said, Spanberger says she intends to pick up the baton and run with Youngkin’s work on building up pharma and biotech.

While most private companies don’t impose term limits on their chief executives, some consultancies and large companies like Deloitte do set term limits for their CEOs. And while modern CEOs generally serve for less time than their predecessors, the average tenure of outgoing CEOs globally for the first half of 2025 was still 6.7 years, according to management consultancy Russell Reynolds. And it’s certainly probable that a leader can likely get more done in 6.7 years than in four.

Allowing Virginia’s governors to pursue at least a second term like other states would not be a path to ruination. Aftervall, the ballot box is a remedy for poor leadership.