Amendment to Remove Presidential Term-Limit

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

This should be shot down immediately.

 

[Tech_Esq]

What an absolutely ridiculous thing to do.

This will not be the last effort though. It is completely in line with my thinking that Obama is the U.S.'s answer to Hugo Chavez. We can expect a lot of CHANGE to come our way.

 

[jillian]

Why? The only reason it was done in the first place was because Roosevelt was elected four times.

 

[bigdaddygtr]

Why? The only reason it was done in the first place was because Roosevelt was elected four times.

I never understood term limits in a Democracy/Republic. If the people like a man/woman and want to keep voting them in as the Prez then so what?

 

[WillowTree]

What an absolutely ridiculous thing to do.

This will not be the last effort though. It is completely in line with my thinking that Obama is the U.S.'s answer to Hugo Chavez. We can expect a lot of CHANGE to come our way.

Marxist to his very core!

 

[Angel Heart]

I want to see term limits for Congress.

 

[editec]

I never understood term limits in a Democracy/Republic. If the people like a man/woman and want to keep voting them in as the Prez then so what?

The natural advantages of an incumbant POTUS are huge.

Before I'd sign onto ending that term limit somebody would have to come up with a really good reason to get rid of it.

I cannot think of one.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Why? The only reason it was done in the first place was because Roosevelt was elected four times.

If we didn't like it the first time it was done, we probably won't like it any better the second time around.

Roosevelt was popular and it isn't easy to get a Constitutional Amendment. If they were able to muster enough support to pass it in response to Roosevelt's presidency, it's probably a good idea.

 

[WillowTree]

Yeah! espescially since FDR up and pulled a John McCain!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I want to see term limits for Congress.

So do I.

 

[Tech_Esq]

So do I.

I'll send you the my law school upper division writing requirement I did on the Constitutionality of Term Limitations. It was filed with the Committee on the Reorganization of Congress in 1993.

Basically, you can't limit terms of congress without an amendment. That being said, it is Constitutional to prevent a person running for congress from having their name printed on the ballot. So, they would have to have one hell of a write in campaign to get elected. This has only successfully been done once.

That's the short synopsis. The long version is 30 pages plus 6 pages of charts and graphs and 189 end notes.....LOL.

 

[Ravi]

I can't see that terms limits are constitutional to begin with. I can understand the wisdom of having them but I can't understand why we the people can't just vote the bums out of office or not.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I can't see that terms limits are constitutional to begin with. I can understand the wisdom of having them but I can't understand why we the people can't just vote the bums out of office or not.

Ravi, so your position is that the 22nd amendment to the Constitution is unconstitutional?

Or are you talking about congressional term limits?

 

[Ravi]

Ravi, so your position is that the 22nd amendment to the Constitution is unconstitutional?

Or are you talking about congressional term limits?

No, obviously the constitution can't be unconstitutional. Perhaps I should have said term limits are against the spirit of the constitution.

 

[jillian]

So do I.

that's right....because people are too stupid to know when they no longer want to vote for someone.

heeeeeeeeeeeellllllppppppppp stop me before I vote again!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[editec]

that's right....because people are too stupid to know when they no longer want to vote for someone.

heeeeeeeeeeeellllllppppppppp stop me before I vote again!!!!!!!!!!!

Come on now, Jill, you know that you and I both actually do think people (en masse) are pretty stupid.

The public are far too easily manipulated by propaganda, and given the failings of our media to be that unofficial fouth check in the check and balances system, can't you see how easily a POTUS could become a tyrant for life?

But more importantly, the presidency is already far too imperious for my plebian tastes.

What we do not need is a POTUS for life, and given what a load of pantie-waste Congress has become as it regards leaving it to the POTUS to make the hard political decisions (as in the Iraq war, for example) allowing any one person to get a lock on the Offal Office just seems like we'd be asking for trouble.

Unless, of course, you want to make ME POTUS for life, of course. Then all my objections are easily overcome.

Naturally my benevolent tyrannical nature would bring on a golden age for America, and anyone who disagreed would be cordially invited to take a dirt-nap to give them forever to think over the error in their thinking.

 

[jillian]

Come on now, Jill, you know that you and both actually do think people (en masse) are pretty stupid.

The public are far too easily manipulated by propaganda, and given the failings of our media to be that unofficial fouth check in the check and balances system, can't you see how easily a POTUS could become a tyrant for life?

But more importantly, the presidency is already far too imperious for my pledbian tastes.

What we do not need is a POTUS for life, and given what a load of pantie-waste Congress has become as it regards leaving it to the POTUS to make the hard political decisions (as in the Iraq war, for example) allowing any one person to get a lock on the Offal Office just seems like we'd be asking for trouble.

Unless, of course, you want to make ME POTUS for life, of course. Then all my objections are easily overcome.

Naturally my benevolent tyrannical nature would bring on a golden age for America, and anyone who disagreed would be cordially invited to take a dirt-nap to give them forever to think over the error in their thinking.

I'm very opposed to term limits. And I generally find that the people who support them are either the "I hate government" types or are unhappy that their party/candidate isn't in the majority so figures they have a better chance without successful incumbants. (note that I said GENERALLY).

Just my opinion on the suject. And it's not about wanting a "president for life". You don't really think any president is going to be able to maintain that level of popularity for that many terms, do you?

 

[manifold]

There should be term limits on every elected public service post at every level of government...IMO.

 

[Skeptik]

There should be term limits on every elected public service post at every level of government...IMO.

Absolutely. Politics was not meant to be a career, but a short term of public service.

Is there really a move to do away with term limits? I got an error message from the link. Did anyone successfully bring it up? Is it at all credible?

 

[GHook93]

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

This should be shot down immediately.

I go both ways! When you have a good thing, sometimes it might be good to keep that person in power! However, it could be ripe for abuse and give too much power to the executive branch. A corrupt but charismatic character could use it to stay in power in definitely

Maybe a vote a limitation, say an approval is needed by both houses to the tune of 60% (or 75%) first to allow a President to seek a 3rd term!

Vote would be a secret ballot!