Two terms tweaked

[Bozo Erectus]

Hey Bozo,why don't you or someone else research and get the material in this thread that states why is it in our amendment that a president serves only 2 terms.

I forgot when that law was enacted.

I dont have the exact date, but it was in response to the multiple terms of FDR. Five minutes in Google would get you all the dates, facts and figures you need. Or try Wikipedia.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Another idea... How about a President can serve MORE than two terms, but they can only serve two in a row. Maybe then we could get Bill to destroy Hillary in the primaries.

 

[dutchfire]

Well sometimes the Prime Minister is the one elected, and the President is a mostly honorary function, assigned by the Senate or something like that. Maybe that's what Dutchfire is referring to?

I'm referring to what we have in the Netherlands. We all vote for certain parties. Those parties get a part of the 150 seats in parliament equal to their part of the votes. Then some parties co-operate to get a majority and they appoint the ministers and Prime Minister. Thus the PM has support of the majority of the population, but isn't elected. The advantage of this is that when we're tired of a Prime Minister and his ministers, it's possible to send them home and getting new ones without having elections.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Another idea... How about a President can serve MORE than two terms, but they can only serve two in a row. Maybe then we could get Bill to destroy Hillary in the primaries.

The wrong hands at the helm for 8 years can be disastrous. Being President is a big job. You could even make an argument that the person will have grown and learned in the intervening four years, and so could be a much more effective President the second time around, if he's able to persuade voters to give him another shot.

 

[bhsup]

But Bozo, the fault for that lies with the American people if we elect the wrong person multiple times. We are responsible for whom we put into office. The term limit amendment, and any term limit law, is in my mind just a cop-out to relieve us of our responsibility to keep a close eye on our elected officials.

 

[Masquerouge]

I dont have the exact date, but it was in response to the multiple terms of FDR. Five minutes in Google would get you all the dates, facts and figures you need. Or try Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

After Roosevelt's death, the newly Republican 80th United States Congress desired to establish a firm constitutional provision barring presidents from being elected more than twice. The rationale was a concern that without limits, the presidential position could become too similar to that of a benevolent dictator lasting not just four years but a lifetime, that the position could become too powerful and upset the separation of powers, and that he could become so powerful that elections would become dispensable. Hence, the Twenty-second Amendment was adopted.

A couple of comments here:
-ooooooh, a Republican congress was pissed off by a 4-term democratic president? Way to not do petty politics!
- why is it assumed that the longer a president stays in power, the more powerful he/she becomes? How does he become more powerful?

 

[.Shane.]

I don't see why someone should be limited to two terms.

Yeah, tbh, I agree with this. Well, more correctly, I believe in consistency. Meaning, if the president has term limits then so should Congress. Or, none of them should.

 

[Masquerouge]

Yeah, tbh, I agree with this. Well, more correctly, I believe in consistency. Meaning, if the president has term limits then so should Congress. Or, none of them should.

Rather, none of them should/
"okay guys so we have that great system called a democracy, anybody can be elected. Well, not actually anybody. And, err, not for too long, okay? You gotta share!"

Now of course, a 95% incumbency rate means that either all US elected senators are extremely competent, or no one cares enough. But I do not think term limits are the answer. Let's not blame our own political apathy on a lack of regulation.

 

[CartesianFart]

Maybe it is the reason that the 2 term limit allows other politicians a chance to compete(good to sell for the party).Think of the analogy of Baseball to Football that in Baseball,the New York Yankees have an advantage over small market teams such as Cleveland Indians with no salary-cap rules in aquiring top-notch players and Football having salary-cap rules for small market teams to compete with other stronger market teams for top-notch players.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

But Bozo, the fault for that lies with the American people if we elect the wrong person multiple times. We are responsible for whom we put into office. The term limit amendment, and any term limit law, is in my mind just a cop-out to relieve us of our responsibility to keep a close eye on our elected officials.

VRW, I know this runs contrary to the rhetoric most people are accustomed to these days, but the fact is the American people are not infallible and all knowing. They can make mistakes colectively, just as individuals do. They can make the wrong choice. That being the case, since the ramifications not only for our country, but for the world can be so dire, I think it would be a good idea for everyone to take a breather every four years, and make as clear headed a decision as possible. Right now because of the power of incumbency, a President, even a corrupt or incompetent one has an unfair advantage, and has an excellent chance of being reelected. This idea would remove the advantage of incumbency, but wouldnt create a situation where theres one lame duck administration after another, because they will run again.

Edit: Masq, thanks for posting the info

 

[bhsup]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution-ooooooh, a Republican congress was pissed off by a 4-term democratic president? Way to not do petty politics!

If it were just Congress, I'd probably agree with you, but remember that 3/4th of the States must also approve an Amendment to the Constitution before it becomes ratified.

EDIT: @Bozo: True, we are not all knowing nor infallible, but the responsibility is still ours.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

- why is it assumed that the longer a president stays in power, the more powerful he/she becomes? How does he become more powerful?

For an answer to this, just look at what Mubarak in Egypt has done.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/Display...ddleeast_March433.xml&section=middleeast&col=

Granted, the US isnt Egypt, but the principle is the same. The longer an administration is in power the more damage it can do to the Constitution, the rule of law, and just about any of the important institutions of the country that he sets his attention on.

 

[emzie]

Instead of limiting consecutive terms, why not reserve the power to kick the president out? Unlimited 4 year terms, but the people have the power to remove you (through State legislatures or something).

 

[warpus]

Well sometimes the Prime Minister is the one elected, and the President is a mostly honorary function, assigned by the Senate or something like that. Maybe that's what Dutchfire is referring to?

Not quite even.. you vote for a party and the leader of the winning party becomes PM.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Instead of limiting consecutive terms, why not reserve the power to kick the president out? Unlimited 4 year terms, but the people have the power to remove you (through State legislatures or something).

I dont think that would be such a good idea. You want to have stability in government. A new vote on a sitting President every six months, or at the whim of demagogues of the opposing party would create dangerous instability in government, and general mayhem.

 

[emzie]

I dont think that would be such a good idea. You want to have stability in government. A new vote on a sitting President every six months, or at the whim of demagogues of the opposing party would create dangerous instability in government, and general mayhem.

It wouldn't be easy. Theoretically, the power already exists!

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Even if its not easy, having to deal with that at every turn, over every decision he or she makes, would cripple the Executive Branch.

Edit: the idea is to limit the power of the individual in the office, not the power of the Presidency itself.

 

[Masquerouge]

For an answer to this, just look at what Mubarak in Egypt has done.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/Display...ddleeast_March433.xml&section=middleeast&col=

Granted, the US isnt Egypt, but the principle is the same. The longer an administration is in power the more damage it can do to the Constitution, the rule of law, and just about any of the important institutions of the country that he sets his attention on.

But surely the US has more checks and balances than Egypt?

So if the people realize a given president is building up too much power, why don't they just vote him out, or at least give control of both chambers to the opposite party?

I guess my main point is that if presidential term limits are required, then the system is not as perfect as it seems.

 

[Masquerouge]

I dont think that would be such a good idea. You want to have stability in government. A new vote on a sitting President every six months, or at the whim of demagogues of the opposing party would create dangerous instability in government, and general mayhem.

Ah! Argument, meet example. French 4th Republic, meet government instability!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Fourth_Republic

Just look at the number of Prime Ministers in barely 10 years:

Prime Minister Starting Party
Paul Ramadier 22 January 1947 SFIO
Robert Schuman 24 November, 1947 MRP
André Marie 26 July 1948 Radical
Robert Schuman 5 September, 1948 MRP
Henri Queuille 11 September, 1948 Radical
Georges Bidault 28 October 1949 MRP
Henri Queuille 2 July 1950 Radical
René Pleven 12 July, 1950 UDSR
Henri Queuille 10 March 1951 Radical
René Pleven 11 August, 1951 UDSR
Edgar Faure 20 January 1952 Radical
Antoine Pinay 8 March, 1952 CNIP
René Mayer 8 January 1953 Radical
Joseph Laniel 27 June, 1953 CNIP
Pierre Mendès-France 18 June 1954 Radical
Edgar Faure 23 February, 1955 Radical
Guy Mollet 31 January 1956 SFIO
Maurice Bourgès-Maunoury 12 June 1957 Radical
Félix Gaillard 6 November, 1957 Radical
Pierre Pflimlin 13 May 1958 MRP
Charles de Gaulle 1 June, 1958 UNR

 

[Mise]

People tend to get bored of 8-year old governments, and 8-year old governments tend to get lazy and stale. So I don't see how getting rid of the 2-term limit would make much of a difference at all, let alone be a Bad Thing.