Thesis: Should the United States President be Limited to the Terms of Service in Office? In this paper, I will argue that the United States president should not be limited to two terms in office. The rational for two terms has been to prevent abuse of power. My argument is based on the benefits of unlimited presidential terms and the hindrance of limited terms on the United States’ economy. An important element to consider is the role democracy plays on presidential terms and elections. The respect of human rights is a significant attribute in a democratic environment and economy. Democracy allows the rights of citizens to be respected, such as an individual’s speech, religion or ethnicity. In a democratic economy every citizen has the …show more content…
In 1947 Senator Claude argued “I think our people are to be safely trusted with their own destiny.” This is exactly what democracy gives the people of United States, a sense of security that the power to select their leader is in their hands. If the people are limited in how many terms the can elect a president, does that not defeat the purpose of democracy? Or if anything conflicts with the sole aim of democracy giving power to the people. Senator Claude also said “We do not need to protect the American people with a prohibition against a president whom they do not wish to elect; and if they wanted to elect him, have we the right to deny them the power?” The answer to that statement should be no, because a democratic government should not reflect any characteristics of a totalitarian government whatsoever. And denying the people their wish who they wish to elect only reflects that. Why prevent a presidential administration from reelection if the rate of effectiveness is high and beneficial to the economy? When elected in to office each president brings for an agenda, which is a list of adequacies to improve the country. Some Presidents successfully accomplished their intended goal at the end of their presidential term, some appear to be completely unsuccessful. And others leave the presidential office with a completely effective plan that appears to die because they cannot recomplete for the presidential sit and the newly
The precedent George Washington had set allow for America to avoid foreign entanglements and keep America from engaging in unnecessary conflicts. Though the early years of America would see much conflict to come, it would not suffer from being forced to act in accordance with a set alliance with other foreign sovereignties. An aspect which is critical in the Presidency is George Washington’s precedent of two-term limit. This change in the prestigious position entailed with it a limitation towards the executive branch and allowed for not one individual to maintain influence for not too long at a time. In setting a two-term limit on the Presidency, George Washington would impact the Presidency by
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.
In this essay, I will be writing about how the power relationship between the United States Congress and the presidency has changed during the past two hundred years. I will be talking about how the executive branch is more powerful than the legislative branch and how the changing relationship between Congress and the president affected American democracy in a good way.
Despite the many crises that the United States has faced historically, democracy has persisted. However, this is not to say that the system is secure or deeply rooted. In fact, based on the events of recent decades, it has been weakening. In How Democracies Die, Levitsky and Ziblatt provide examples of how American democracy has exemplified the positive and negative aspects of other global democracies of the past and present. Although the US is exceptional in some ways, with its longstanding democratic institutions and diverse population, it is more similar to others than different. Thus, the idea that few parallels can be drawn to other nations is disproven. The process of comparing each state is analogous to that of differentiating between
What then would be the benefit of limiting the term of a Supreme Court Justice? The reasoning for the limitation begins with the level of contention that becomes present in the United States Senate when a vacancy evolves. For the purpose of enlightenment, we can reflect back to the
Congressional terms have no limits. Controversy exists between those who think the terms should be limited and those who believe that terms should remain unlimited. The group that wants to limit the terms argues that the change will promote fresh ideas and reduce the possibility of decisions being made for self-interest. Those who oppose term limits believe that we would sacrifice both the stability and experience held by veteran politicians. They also point out that our election process allows the voter to limit terms, at their discretion. While experience and stability are important considerations, congressional terms should be limited to a maximum of two.
According to Hamilton, the president of the United States shall be elected for a term of four years, and if the electorate believes that the president is worthy of office, the president is eligible for re-election for another four-year term (The Federalist Papers, 2015). However, the King of
America’s founding father, George Washington, set the pattern for presidential term limits to two four year terms; but not through any legislative means. Before 1947, there were no term limit rules. George Washington’s footsteps as the first President set an unbroken precedent for term limits, but it wasn’t until much later that the 22nd Amendment was passed. In more recent years, politicians and citizens alike have begun to point out more of the flaws in the two-term limit than ever before; and they are on the right track. Restricting the president to a two-term limits the president’s effectiveness in office, provides the opportunity for an elected president to abuse power, and restricts a current president from continuing a successful policy even when majority wishes for the opposite
A term limit is made prevents government officials from serving for more than a specified number of terms. The
American people are use to being able to vote for a new president especially if the one that is in office is not doing a good job for the people. I like the way it is because when we limit it to only two terms it helps bring in qualified people with new views and that may have a different outlook on how things are being handled in the White House. Conflict will arise either way you choose to go and personally I think that if it isn’t broke why try to fix it. We as voters enjoy exercising our right to vote, but I strongly feel that the government has the right to put who it wants in office no matter what. So, presidents having limits on how long they can run is our savior because sometimes you can vote and vote and your voice remain unheard.
Having term limits would be good because there would be a definite change every so many years. If the people did not like what was going on then they would know that as soon as the term was over they could be replaced.
In this essay, I propose to amend the Constitution by introducing a required term limit for Supreme Court justices. I am proposing this change because I believe that implementing a term limit will lead to an increased representation of the people and eliminate possible obstructions to the Supreme Court’s ability to do its job.
The fifth major point George Washington’s Farewell Address that is mention is “Two terms only of four years of Presidency”. The Presidents of United States who had served their two terms in the White House but were also obligated in some time to be able to serve four terms were not allowed to because in the Amendment, it doesn’t state that “a president is allowed to serve more than two terms itself”.
The president's time in office now is at most two terms which is 8 years. The president for sure has a 4 year term with possible re-election after the first term. I believe that the president should have one term of 6 years. One of the articles that I read also said it would be a good idea for a six year presidency. The article states, “I’m not running for office again. I just believe it's the right thing to do”. This was stated my Obama. This is one reason I believe Presidents should have a one 6 year term. The President has a lot of things on their plate and being a President for 8 years can cause a lot of stress and many other problems. So if it would only be 6 years it would be a happy medium.
It was passed by Congress in 1947 on March 21 and was ratified on Feb. 27, 1951 almost four years later. Not too long ago, many presidents had actually considered running for more than two terms. Ulysses. Grant, Grover Cleveland, and Theodore Roosevelt unsuccessfully tried to and only Franklin Roosevelt succeeded. He won a third and fourth term. A few years later, Congress took into consideration a proposal to limit presidency to two terms. The 22nd amendment was debated, passed, and ratified without much drama. I would change this amendment because with proper background searches, voting, and careful consideration I think it’d be very wise to have the availability to keep a president in office for more than two terms if citizens agree to it. I think that there should be a limit but not at exactly two terms. I believe that it should be up to the people voting to decide who is president and for how long they want to keep that person their president, especially if they’re doing well in office. You can find the amendment process in the two ways that amendments are proposed. Amendments can be proposed by Congress if at least 2/3 of the members of both the House of Representatives (290) and the senate (67) vote for it. Step 1 in amending the constitution is that two-thirds of both houses of Congress pass a constitutional amendment. This sends the amendment to the states for ratification. Three-fourths of