Should the 22nd Amendment Be Repealed

The United States Constitution overcame the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and provided for the organization of the new government. After the American Revolutionary War in America, the colonists needed a government so no one could take away their power. The Articles of Confederation overcame the weaknesses by creating settling in the Western Lands, and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. The Constitutional Convention provided for the organization of the new government by creating The Great Compromise and The Three-Fifths Compromise. Every state had to ratify the constitution, and not every state would agree for the Constitution to be ratified, this provided for the organization of the new government. The United States Constitution

Until 1951, there was no law restricting the number of times the president of the United States could run for office. After the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Congress proposed the 22nd Amendment. Since its ratification, the highly controversial amendment has survived every attempted repeal. Contemporary presidents of both parties, President Regan and President Clinton, supported repealing or modifying the amendment whereas other presidents believed a repeal would result in political stagnation. While there are certain benefits of restricted term limits, the otherwise undemocratic 22nd Amendment should be repealed.

According to Jost (2012), the nation has contradicting views on political issues which divide where we think the appropriate role of the government lies (p. 743). American politics is complex and reflects a partisan system, making it challenging for governmental officials to decide on whether or not to re-examine the constitution. Another crucial point when analyzing this issue, is a person’s positionality in the American society determines their view on the

My second amendment I want to consider changing is the 22th amendment the terms of the president. This amendment was created to limit the terms of the president. I believe it should be changed because if the president was really making the U.S better I would want him or her to continue doing a fantastic job. My reasoning is if American was in poor shape and a great president came along and fixed the country up and had us in the best shape of our history but then the president would have to leave after a second term and leave us with potentially detrimental change (Debate.com). Regardless of the rules if the president is performing his duties adequately and continues to improve our country he should be allowed to run if he is willing to do the

The debate on the immigration reform has many dimensions which are important legally, morally, socially, culturally, and politically. Giving full citizenship or denying legal status to

     Those opposed to ending the clause in the Birthright Citizenship Amendment argue “The framers' intent was to create an objective basis for establishing citizenship—birth—not a subjective standard left to the whim of a majority. The United

carried on afterward. The most prominent effect of these was the financial hit that local and state

The twelfth amendment that created the electoral college, was passed by congress in 1803, and has been instilled since. For the next presidential election, I believe the current situation should continue to be instilled. It has been in place now for over 200 years. It has been working for these past 200 years without major issues which is why I believe it could continue for another 200 years. I don’t think completely abolishing the electoral college is a good idea since it would make the people of the U.S completely in control. I also don’t believe amending the twelfth amendment is necessary. The current system we have in place for the electoral college should continue since it prevents the people from electing an unfit president. I am aware of the fact that in the year 2016, most people have some sort of education,

The US constitution is the blueprint of many other constitutions around the world. Our constitution is the cornerstone of many other countries bill of rights, even if they don’t follow it word for word the inspiration is clearly visible. The 2nd amendment “the right to bear arms” is something that isn’t seen in many other constitutions, and in the US there is major debate on it ranging from the interpretation, if guns should be banned, should anyone be allowed a weapon no questions asked, it goes on and on with no end in sight. I feel the 2nd amendment should be modified to include gun regulations, because other amendments were changed and updated for current times, regulations will prevent guns from ending up in hands of criminals, and regulations will not stop law abiding citizens from owning a weapon. Adding some extra words to the 2nd amendment will end debate over little things, and make all reasonable people happy.

The United States is a nation built on independence and freedom. This freedom, established through the constitution, allows American citizens to be able to participate in their government. The same constitution also restricts freedom of some Americans however. The naturalization clause amended to the constitution in 1790, forbids naturalized citizens from becoming president. Many naturalized citizens have lived in America for most of their lives and contribute to society just as much as a natural born citizen does. The naturalized clause of 1790 should be removed from the constitution so that naturalized citizens also have a chance to run for the presidency.

In the political world today there are so many different opinions about several different topics. The topics that I will address to you will be, should the 22nd Amendment be repealed and also should the foreign born be allowed to run for president. In both topics you may have your pros and cons, but I am strongly against the both of them because I feel that the Constitution should not be taken advantage of. Government should not be allowed to manipulate the Constitution to suit his or her needs. While making adjustments to the Constitution to allow different things to take place for convenience doesn’t leave any form respect of the Constitution. There should be a line drawn to keep this from happening for years to come on these issues and

Patrick J. Buchanan wrote an article titled “Is This Our America Anymore?”, his position is anti-immigration and believes that America will not be ours anymore. Mr. Buchanan stated in his article “ The border will disappear, and America will be a geographical expression, not a country anymore”.(paragraph 14) Buchanan believes this because according to him “it will not be long before Colorado, Nevada, Arizona and Texas resemble California, which is on the brink of default¨.(Buchanan paragraph 12)

In the current situation of making a decision whether to ratify or not ratify the Constitution, the Constitution should not be ratified. Due to serious problems and issues that could arise, and the problems and issues experienced in the past under the British parliament, the Constitution should not be passed and the Articles of Confederation should be kept to keep a strong state government. Issues like being under complete under control, favoring the wealthy, and having no rights should be corrected.

Our Second Amendment is near extinction because of a variety of different things.whether it be school shootings or just shootings in general. If you are a liberal you might be offended by this essay because i'm pro Second Amendment. There are many reasons for me to be pro Second Amendment.Like…

Hello everyone, Good Afternoon. I stand before you because there are many issues regarding our politics and how things are going to be from now on. I am speaking about the way the government might run the law, and I am here to assure you that whatever changes happen, we want to make those changes for the better of all of you. I completely understand your concerns, it is always frightening when big changes are being talked about. This Constitution drafted in Philadelphia this past summer has brought a lot of uncertainty to many of you, I know that when the future of this country is kind of on the loose, it is difficult to decide which side we are on. Because yes, I know that we are still not certain of what exactly is going to happen with the way the Government is going to run this country. And I understand that local offices have worked well for some counties, but I want to open your eyes to other options that might be more helpful. It can be difficult to grasp the idea of having a person running or serving as president of a united country, and many of you might think that this sounds more like a person being the leader of the army running a divided country. But that is another reason why I am here today, to explain how this can be beneficial and to assure you that whatever decision is made, is going to be made by you, the people. And we are here to listen to you, and make the decision based on your needs, and the needs of the rest of the states. That is why I want to speak