Should the Presidential term be changed to 8 years????

[getthismoney]

Does it matter? i doubt we have any influence over who's president anyway

 

[optimusprimeaphia]

Originally Posted by GetThisMoney

Does it matter? i doubt we have any influence over who's president anyway

THIS



and


This:

[h1][/h1]

[h1]Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution[/h1] [h3]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/h3]
Jump to: navigation, search
[table][tr][td]United States of America[/td] [/tr][tr][td]



This article is part of the series:
United States Constitution

---

[/td] [/tr][tr][th=""]Original text of the Constitution[/th] [/tr][tr][td] Preamble

Articles of the Constitution
I · II · III · IV · V · VI · VII
[/td] [/tr][tr][th=""]Amendments to the Constitution[/th] [/tr][tr][td] Bill of Rights
I · II · III · IV · V · VI · VII · VIII · IX · X

Subsequent Amendments
XI · XII · XIII · XIV · XV
XVI · XVII · XVIII · XIX · XX
XXI · XXII · XXIII · XXIV · XXV
XXVI · XXVII
[/td] [/tr][tr][td]

---

Other countries · Law Portal
view • talk • edit
[/td] [/tr][/table]


Amendment XXII in the National Archives

The Twenty-second Amendment (Amendment XXII) of the United States Constitution sets a term limit for the President of the United States. The Congress passed the amendment on March 21, 1947.[sup][1][/sup] It was ratified by the requisite number of states on February 27, 1951. The Amendment was the final result of the recommendations of the Hoover Commission which was established by President Harry S. Truman in 1947.[sup][citation needed][/sup]
[table][tr][td]
[h2]Contents[/h2][hide]

• 1 Text
• 2 History
• 3 Criticism
• 4 Interaction with the Twelfth Amendment
• 5 Affected individuals
• 6 See also
• 7 References
• 8 External links

[/td] [/tr][/table][h2][edit] Text[/h2]

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

[h2][edit] History[/h2]
Historians point to George Washington's decision not to seek a third term as evidence that the Founders saw a two-term limit as convention and a bulwark against a monarchy; his Farewell Address, however, suggests that it was because of his age that he did not seek reelection. Thomas Jefferson also contributed to the convention of a two-term limit; in 1807 he wrote, "if some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life."[sup][2][/sup] Jefferson's immediate successors, James Madison and James Monroe, also adhered to the two-term principle.

Prior to Franklin D. Roosevelt, few Presidents attempted to serve for more than two terms. Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in 1880 after serving from 1869 to 1877, but narrowly lost his party's nomination. Theodore Roosevelt succeeded to the presidency upon William McKinley's assassination and was elected in 1904 to a full term himself, serving from 1901 to 1909. He sought to be elected to a (non-consecutive) term in 1912 but lost to Woodrow Wilson. In 1940, Franklin D. Roosevelt became the only president to be elected to a third term; supporters cited the war in Europe as a reason for breaking with precedent. In the 1944 election, during World War II, he won a fourth term, but suffered a cerebral hemorrhage and died in office the following year. Thus, Roosevelt was the only President to have exceeded the limits provided by the Twenty-second Amendment prior to its ratification.

The Amendment was the final result of the recommendations of the Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government, or more commonly known as the Hoover Commission which was established by President Harry S. Truman in 1947 as a response to the unprecedented four Presidential terms of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Members of the Hoover Commission besides Hoover, were former Postmaster General and F.D.R's campaign manager James Farley, future Secretary of State Dean Acheson, Senator George Aiken of Vermont, Representative Brown, Secretary of Defense James V. Forrestal, Civil Service Commissioner Arthur S. Flemming, former Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy, political scientist James Kerr Pollock, attorney James H. Rowe, Representative Carter Manasco of Alabama, industrialist George Mead and Senator John L. McClellan of Arkansas. Aiken, Brown, Flemming, Hoover, Mead and Pollock were Republicans.[sup][citation needed][/sup]
[h2][edit] Criticism[/h2]
Dwight D. Eisenhower, the first president to whom the amendment applied, expressed concern over the erosion of a second-term president's power and influence, as the president becomes a political lame duck. The term was coined by 18th century English stockbrokers to mean someone who is bankrupt, but later came to mean anyone who has been made weak and ineffective. It now most often applies to politicians who are soon to leave office or are ineligible to run for another term due to legal restriction.

In addition, several congressmen, including Rep. Barney Frank, Rep. José Serrano,[sup][3][/sup] Rep. Howard Berman,[sup][4][/sup] and Sen. Harry Reid[sup][5][/sup], have introduced legislation to repeal the Twenty-second Amendment, but each resolution died before making it out of its respective committee. There have also been proposals to remove the absolute two term limit and replace it with no more than two consecutive terms.
[h2][edit] Interaction with the Twelfth Amendment[/h2]
There is an open question regarding the interpretation of the Twenty-second Amendment as it relates to the Twelfth Amendment, ratified in 1804, which provides that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States."

While it is clear that under the Twelfth Amendment the original constitutional qualifications of age, citizenship, and residency apply to both the President and Vice President, it is unclear if a two-term President could later be elected-or appointed-Vice President. Some argue[sup][6][/sup] that the Twenty-second Amendment and Twelfth Amendment bar any two-term President from later serving as Vice President as well as from succeeding to the presidency from any point in the United States presidential line of succession. Others contend[sup][7][/sup][sup][8][/sup] that the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election, and thus a former two-term president is still eligible to serve as president. Neither theory has ever been tested, as no former President has ever sought the Vice Presidency, and thus the courts have never been required to make a judgment.
[h2][edit] Affected individuals[/h2]
The Amendment prohibits any person who has succeeded to the Presidency and served as President or as Acting President for more than two years of their predecessor's unexpired term from being elected more than once.

The amendment specifically excluded the sitting president (Harry S. Truman) at the time it was proposed by Congress. Truman, who had served most of FDR's unexpired fourth term and who had been elected to a full term in 1948, began a campaign for another term in 1952, but quit after a poor showing in the New Hampshire primary.

Since the Amendment's ratification, the only President who could have served more than two terms under current circumstances was Lyndon B. Johnson. He became President in 1963 when John F. Kennedy was assassinated, served the final 14 months of Kennedy's term, and was elected President in 1964. Had Johnson remained in the race in 1968 and won, he would have served nine years and two months in all when he reached the end of the new term.

Gerald Ford became President on August 9, 1974, and occupied the office for more than two years of Nixon's unexpired term. Thus, had Ford won a full term in 1976 (he lost to Jimmy Carter), he would have been ineligible to run in 1980, despite only being elected once.

The only individuals who have been prohibited from continuing to seek the presidency under the amendment are Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Dwight D. Eisenhower; all served two consecutive terms. Former presidents Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush, both defeated after only one term (in 1980 and 1992 respectively), and current President Barack Obama are all eligible to seek the office again.
[h2][edit] See also[/h2]

• Term limits in the United States
• Hoover Commission
• Harry S. Truman
• James Farley
• Franklin D. Roosevelt

[h2][edit] References[/h2]

1. ^ Charters of Freedom - The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, The Bill of Rights
2. ^ Thomas Jefferson: Reply to the Legislature of Vermont, 1807. ME 16:293
3. ^ H.J.Res.5. Introduced January 6, 2009.
4. ^ "Lawmakers aim to repeal 22nd Amendment". Los Angeles Daily News. 2005-06-28. http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/lawmakers_aim_repeal_22nd_amendment.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-30.
5. ^ S.J.RES.36. Sponsored by Harry Reid. January 31, 1989.
6. ^ Matthew J. Franck (2007-07-31). Constitutional Sleight of Hand. National Review Online. http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDgwODVmMzcwMTQwNDM3YjU0OGE5ZjQyOTIxNmUyYzY=. Retrieved 2008-06-12.
7. ^ Michael C. Dorf. "Why the Constitution permits a Gore-Clinton ticket". CNN Interactive. http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/08/columns/fl.dorf.goreclinton.08.01/.
8. ^ Scott E. Gant; Bruce G. Peabody (2006-06-13). "How to bring back Bill". Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0613/p09s02-coop.html. Retrieved 2008-06-12.

• Constitution of the United States.
• Bruce G. Peabody and Scott E. Gant (1997). "The Twice and Future President: Constitutional Interstices and the Twenty-Second Amendment," Minnesota Law Review 83, no. 3. February 1999: 565-635.

[h2][edit] External links[/h2]

• National Archives: Twenty second Amendment
• H.J.RES.5 - The latest bill introduced in Congress proposing to repeal the Twenty second Amendment. There have been many similar proposals introduced in previous Congresses, none of which has been acted on. This proposal remains in committee.
• CRS Annotated Constitution: Twenty second Amendment

• http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt22toc_user.html

 

[rexanglorum]

A single but longer term might be an improvement if there was a much lower threshold to impeachment and conviction. In other words, you would be entrusted witha lot of power and would not have to ever face reelection but if you make a lot of bad decisions you could be, as they say in parliamentary systems, sacked bya bare majority in the House and a 55-60 vote majority in the Senate.

I believe that while elected officials should be held accountable, I also believe that constantly facing reelection causes policy makers to act in a shortsighted manner.

 

[hypebeast21]

NOOOO

 

[solidgold]

Hellll no

 

[wawaweewa]

Popular vote = mob rule.

What should be looked at are the requirements to become a voting citizen.

 

[airmaxwun]

Originally Posted by Je Ne Sais Quoi

I'd rather get rid of the electoral college and have it solely on the popular vote.

Al Gore would have been president

 

[eghckk]

The amount of time a political puppet spends in office won't change they fact that they're still a puppet. The current system that's in place nowworks though so there's no point in changing it.

 

[juice2352]

Terrible idea...emphatic no.

 

[shaq diesel 34]

No. /end thread. Seriously. Why the hell? No.

 

[burns1923]

Because things Clinton and Bush did in office are effecting Obama. And so on and so on. 4 years just doesnt seem like a long time to do all the things a prez needs to do to fix the country in the way he thinks it should be fixed.

The president, like any elected representative, is elected to do the will of the people - to lead the country's vision, not his singular re-imagining or,as Obama put it, "fundamentally transforming the United States of America."

WE The People.

As to changing presidential term limits in any way...

 

[datprepboivinc3]

Naww Dawgg

 

[reigndrop]

In theory, it isn't such a bad idea. Think about it, for an elected president, it usually takes him about a year to settle, right? After that, he starts tocampaign for members within his party. That leaves him with just year 3 to really focus on things. Year 4 and he's back campaigning for members of hisparty, and himself. Just a thought that came to mind..

 

[untouchable jc]

Not a very good idea, a dictatorship would not be far behind

 

[warmachine]

Originally Posted by untouchable jc

Not a very good idea, a dictatorship would not be far behind

do you know what you idiots are saying?

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by reigndrop

In theory, it isn't such a bad idea. Think about it, for an elected president, it usually takes him about a year to settle, right? After that, he starts to campaign for members within his party. That leaves him with just year 3 to really focus on things. Year 4 and he's back campaigning for members of his party, and himself. Just a thought that came to mind..

That's how most go about it. That doesn't mean it's the only or even the correct way to go about things.

 

[51and3rd]

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by reigndrop

In theory, it isn't such a bad idea. Think about it, for an elected president, it usually takes him about a year to settle, right? After that, he starts to campaign for members within his party. That leaves him with just year 3 to really focus on things. Year 4 and he's back campaigning for members of his party, and himself. Just a thought that came to mind..

That's how most go about it. That doesn't mean it's the only or even the correct way to go about things.

Explain another way. 4 yrs just seems like a really short time to fix a whole nation.

 

[theta]

i move we change it to 25 years while were at it. hell, why even have elections?

 

[nostrandave68]

Its not really the President we need to be worried about right now its Congress... think there needs to be shorter time limits on Senators similar to how theHouse Reps only serve 2yrs. The problem we have now is lobbyists basically having input on everything in Congress.. shorter term limits for Senators helps toquell long lasting relationships between lobbyists and Senators and also makes performance based governing more prominent.

Since we talking about President tho.. I'd be okay with a 1 term 6yr limit. 4yrs in actuality isn't that long since Presidents don't really getmuch passed in their 1st year then they begin to campaign for reelection in their 3rd yr. 8yrs is far too long

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by 51and3rd

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by reigndrop

In theory, it isn't such a bad idea. Think about it, for an elected president, it usually takes him about a year to settle, right? After that, he starts to campaign for members within his party. That leaves him with just year 3 to really focus on things. Year 4 and he's back campaigning for members of his party, and himself. Just a thought that came to mind..

That's how most go about it. That doesn't mean it's the only or even the correct way to go about things.

Explain another way. 4 yrs just seems like a really short time to fix a whole nation.

The President is not in place to fix anything per se. He's there to lead. To set an example. The President of theUS has a bully pulpit like no other but few in our time seem to use it except for cheap political rhetoric. We don't have presidents anymore. We haveactors. All fluff, no substance.

 

[finessesosa]

God forbid.

 

[Master Zik]

No.

Things would probably have been way too unbearable if ppl thought they couldn't have a chance of a new pres after Bush's first term. I'd guessit'd be the same for ppl who aren't for Obama currently.

What should be done is getting rid of this bs unwritten rule of 2 terms and you can't run again. I wish we had Clinton one more term. I like dudes like FDRwho had the balls to say %+%+ the rules(although the circumstances of his 3rd term allowed it) and run for a 3rd term.

The framers and everyone making it the precedent were a lil to scared of the thought of a possible dictator/king of the U.S.

 

[untouchable jc]

Originally Posted by WarMachine

Originally Posted by untouchable jc

Not a very good idea, a dictatorship would not be far behind

do you know what you idiots are saying?

i know what i'm saying... maybe you didn't understand what i meant by that but let me explain:

when you let one man have the highest position in your country for a long time without a normal time limit you get problems... case in point, hugo chavez whoeven though was voted in hasn't left office in about 8 or 9 years while his people want him out... other example, hitler when he received thechancellorship but never returned power and we all know how that went

 

[deletedelete]

no &

Originally Posted by Je Ne Sais Quoi

I'd rather get rid of the electoral college and have it solely on the popular vote.

this.

 

[hugo]

no