New York Congressman Jose Serrano (D) has introduced a bill to abolish the 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution, which limits the maximum number of presidential terms to two consecutive terms or ten years in office.
The amendment which was added in 1951 has gone unchallenged since its introduction, leaving Franklin Delano Roosevelt the only US president to serve more than two terms. Roosevelt died shortly after winning his fourth election.
The 22nd Amendment was introduced under the suggestion that the president has too much power in order to be allowed to stay in office for too long a time.
"...has gone unchallenged since its introduction..."
Uh, no.
This bill has been introduced by the same group of democrat and republican congresscritters every congressional session for the last couple decades. This is not an Obama-focused bill, just like it wasn't a Bush 43 bill, and wasn't a Clinton bill, and wasn't a Bush 41 bill.
Obama is hugely popular at the moment - probably the most popular he will be as president because the people haven't yet had a chance to realise he's not the messiah.
But remember that this won't just apply to Mr. Popular, it will also apply for Mr. Sucessor, Mr. Successor II, and so on. The next time you have a G.B. in the presidential position, there won't be anything to stop from running for eternity.
i would hate to see another bush to go on for eternity..but.. Why limit a good thing, if you have a leader that is representing use well and is making the country run well why limit there term. Is this not limiting democracy, if you can't pick the leader you want because they have been the leader for too many years you have the potential to damage the performance of your country.
You make a fair point, but the reality exists (and trust me it's VERY real) for despots and tyrants to enter power.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that a tyrannical leader would have to have a silly moustache and shout a lot. Companies spend millions each day on advertising to make sure you see what they want you to see. Politics is no different.
When facism arrives in America, it will be waving the American flag and have a big smile on it's face.
There are already exclusions that grant the president the ability to stay past his two terms during extraordinary times, abolishing the two term limit is NOT necessary and not needed. A near decade of a president is good enough.
When it's good and things get done I know there is feel-good feeling that you want to keep around presidents. But look: horrible presidents get re-elected too. Look at Bush. Would you *really* want a Bush in office for twenty or more years? NO!
First of all, this is not a bill that has arisen because of Barack Obama. This is not anything that he himself has even commented on, so this title is misleading and politically motivated.
Second of all I hope that this bill fails. I love Barack and will be voting democratic in the next election, either way, but the 22nd Amendment is correct in stating that 2 terms should be the maximum - to prevent a single person from getting too powerful. We need fresh ideas and people, and that won't be able to happen as easily.
If it were up to me, I'd allow the President to stay in power for a single 6 year period - this way he doesn't use the first four years to get re-elected the second term. He can hit the ground running and getting what needs to be done without having to kiss the asses of large corporations and ensure union votes and votes from the common person....
Wasn't something similar to that done in a South American country recently? Didn't the Venezuelan National Assembly vote in favor of lifting term limits for elected officials.....
- Its' a kooky bill, - the only ones paying attention are the ones ridiculing it - Obama hasn't even commented on it - National TV is ignoring this - no one's committed a crime.
As much as I like Obama I believe he will not be unblemished at the end of a possible eight years.
The United States must remain in a state of revolution to survive, term limits on the presidency insure this. I would also support term limits on the congress.
and yet only 1 person out of more than a dozen has acknowledge that the limiting terms is infact undemocratic... under a good leader i'd take term after term after term... the probleme with corrupt is not actually corruption but complacency... america allowed bush to stay in office they allowed him to get re-elected, the problem isn't with more than two term limits (and why two... why not 1 if where imposing limits) it'ss with democracy being broke by complacency, the people are often completely irresponsible when it come to keeping their leaders inline; which is vital in democracy... otherwise its not democracy as the people aren't the ones with the power.
You can really tell that someone is not willing to take in any other viewpoints, when the only thing they bring up is that Obama did not have anything to do with this, and didnt comment on it, and they tried to pass it with other presidents....yada yada yada... No Fricken duh. But he is the president, so it would affect him, and that is why his name was used. Hugo did not misreprent anything.
If you really don't think there's anything wrong with it I suggest you take good hard look at Russia during the Stalin reighn.
There are term limits for a reason. POWER CORRUPTS AND ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY.
That is a fact.
Obama is no better than any of the other presidents. Also, I fail to see the good he's done. Bush started the stimulus package deal, but all of a sudden because Obama wants to do it, it's a wonderful idea.
You people had better wake up and smell what he's shoveling.
