Three Terms for Barack Obama?
By Mark Impomeni
Jan 14th 2009 10:00PMFiled Under: eHouse, Barack Obama, Obama Administration
With President-elect Barack Obama set to take the oath of office to begin his first term, one New York Congressman wants to make it possible for him to one day serve a third. Representative Jose Serrano (D) has introduced a bill in the House to abolish the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two consecutive terms or ten years in office.
Until 1951, there was nothing preventing a president from seeing election for more than two terms. But all presidents prior to Franklin Delano Roosevelt honored a tradition begun by George Washington and served only two consecutive terms. Roosevelt stood for election for an unprecedented third term at the dawn of World War II and was elected to a fourth, only to die in office within months of his inauguration. He is the only American president to serve more than two terms.
The theory behind the 22nd Amendment is that modern day presidents exercise too much power and authority to be allowed access to it for very long. On the other hand, the presidency is the only federal office that is term-limited. The same arguments in favor of limiting presidents' time in office can be applied to Representatives and Senators as well.
What do you think? Should the 22nd Amendment be repealed? Should presidents be allowed to serve for as along as the people will elect them? And should Barack Obama be the first beneficiary of the proposed change?
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/01/14/three-terms-for-barack-obama/?icid=200100397x1217182314x1201144246
|
by
Denise W.
Member since:
August 2, 2006 Three Terms for Barack Obama?
January 15, 2009 01:24 PM EST
views: 84
|
comments: 34
To Groups:
! 44 by 4400 Group !, ! ~~20 Comments~~ !, !! POINT ME TO THE TOP !!, !!! ViewMasters !!!, *"Pay It Forward"*, a ten we send, Anything Decent, Endless points, Friends Of Dan H, Friends of DN, Friends on Gather, Gather Broadcasting, Group With No Theme, Helping hands, In The News, It's Superfluous, Literally Running Over, To Overflow, Whatever, Point Whore, ~pinky finger friends~, UpAllNiteCafe
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
|
|
More by Denise W. |
||||
About Gather |
Engagement Marketing |
Make New Friends |
Gather Points |
Advertise on Gather |
Gather Press |
Privacy |
Terms of Service |
Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16961, "Pacino"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.


Comments: 34
thats shouldnt be allowed for anyeone
and esp now when you dont have a clue if he will be good or not
bring it up for the vote
Animal Glitters
An argument for would be to avoid the lame duck loss of power of the 2nd term president for a while. An argument against would be that in shaping the Judiciary for 12 years and other appointments, the president would be too powerful.
I believe 8 years is sufficient at a time, but with the election of younger presidents, it might be nice to allow them to run again after leaving office.