In Praise of Presidential Term Limits

Eight Years: No More

 

Teddy Roosevelt might have added to his credentials as an effective president and strong leader in 1912 had William Howard Taft stepped aside. As it was, the Republicans split and a morose former New Jersey governor became chief executive at one of the world’s most crucially important periods. Good history is not, however, twilight zone speculation. In 2011, the Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution, adopted in 1951, begins with the statement, “No person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice…” In part, the amendment was a reaction to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s unprecedented four terms.

 

The Washington Tradition of Serving Two Presidential Terms

 

Before 1951, serving two terms as President was a tradition based on the example of George Washington. The Founding Fathers rightly concluded that enough checks and balances existed within the system to avert any abuse of power by potential oligarchs suffering from the megalomania of another King George III. Term limits were not entered into the Constitution. Teddy Roosevelt was the first man to challenge this tradition, although it can be conceded that his first term was not his own, begun when President William McKinley was assassinated in 1901.

 

Franklin Roosevelt, however, was elected by a large margin in 1932 and when World War II broke out after Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, FDR became a war president, much like Abraham Lincoln before him in the 19^th Century. American voters have never replaced a President during times of war, unless those men, like President Lyndon Johnson, decided against reelection.

 

Congress Passes Presidential Term Limits

 

But the 80^th Congress in 1947 was controlled by Republicans, elected in 1946 during the second year of President Truman’s tenure as chief executive. Their victory represented dissatisfaction with on-going war time rationing and price controls.They passed the Twenty-Second Amendment that was subsequently adopted by the requisite number of states. For some Republicans, it was also a reaction to the frequent criticism that FDR had turned the war time presidency into a dictatorship and that the New Deal, which Truman wanted to expand, was nothing more than socialism.

 

Current Moves to Amend the U.S. Constitution

 

The 112^th Congress was seated in January 2011 and includes a number of members that want to repeal certain Constitutional amendments. Conservative Republicans, for example, want to repeal all or parts of the Fourteenth Amendment defining American citizenship. This may become even more vital for some Tea Party Republicans fearful that provisions in the amendment might be interpreted by Presidents to unilaterally increase the nation’s debt ceiling at some future point.

 

Democrats, however, should consider a repeal of the Twenty-Second Amendment. A rapid repeal would enable men like former President Bill Clinton another opportunity to exercise leadership and solve the nation’s domestic problems. Many observers note that President Obama, despite the rhetoric of “hope,” has been a dismal leader, perhaps even a failure. At the same time, Republican candidates for the presidency, notably front runner Mitt Romney, have hibernated during the July 2011 debt ceiling crisis.

 

Ordinary Americans Want an End to Capitol Hill Gridlock

 

The silence of the wolves has left many Americans seeking integrity and leadership in Washington, D.C. (see Pugh Research poll, August 1, 2011) Non-committed potential candidates have fared no better. Texas Governor Rick Perry is content to pray for divine guidance, perhaps in violation of the First Amendment. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie entered the hospital following an asthma attack. This, however, may be the most understood reaction to the on-going debacle in the nation’s capital, perhaps more so than Michele Bachmann’s migraine headaches.

 

While the Congress is thinking about amendments, it might also consider a change to the Constitution allowing naturalized citizens to serve as President. Although former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger might have been a strong possibility before his infidelities became public, the United States in 2011 is a nation full of successful men and women not born in the nation.

 

In the 1960’s, George Romney, the father of Mitt, was questioned regarding his eligibility for the presidency, having been born in Mexico to American parents living in a Mormon community. Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before it became a state; John McCain was born in Panama. Both men ran for the presidency and lost.

 

Has the Debt Ceiling Crisis Turned Obama into a Lame Duck?

 

Throughout the debt ceiling negotiations, President Obama has been reactive rather than proactive. His own party views him with distrust and he may emerge as the greatest casualty of the process, a president without a caucus. At least in that sense Sarah Palin was right, calling him a “lame duck” President. Like Jimmy Carter in 1980, Obama may face a challenge in the primaries from within his own party. For Democrats, that would truly be “change we can believe in.”

 

In the summer of 2011, neither political party generated confidence among the nation’s everyday working men and women. Within the Republican Party, Tea Party extremists can claim responsibility for creating fear, not just among the poor and the elderly, but among U.S. combat troops told by the Joint Chiefs chairman Admiral Mike Mullen (August 30, 2011) that they might not get paid. Tea Party zealots have become the post-modern barnburners, a term identified with the election of 1848. These “patriots” are willing to burn down the barn with the Boehner rats inside.

 

Repealing the Twenty-Second Amendment would enable Bill Clinton to seek the nomination, the last president able to work with Congress as an independently minded chief executive, decrease the deficit, and still preserve Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. He also faced a government shut-down, but emerged successfully. The Founding Fathers, however, made the amendment process cumbersome. Thus, without a “dark horse” white knight candidate, the nation may face more years of a “do nothing” government.

 

And that is exactly what has happened. In our current climate, the117th Congress is at a stalemate, unable to put into practice President Joe Biden’s agenda. Additionally, the nation is besotted with conspiracy stories of the worst magnitude intent on reinstating the former president, Donald Trump.

Trump is the greatest antithesis of Democratic government and would ruin America in every which way possible.

 

NO LEADERS

 

Into this vacuum sits a Congress in which Republicans still pay homage to the emperor-like Trump while Democrats are beginning to frazzle as well.

And this bring us back to term limits for presidents. Term limits exceeding two – 8 years, would vastly increase the power of one man at the expense of the Legislative body of Congress. And in this Congress, there are no leaders, thus making it easier to see the bleary and the weary on repealing the 22^nd Amendment so that Trump will be in league with the Chinese leader as well as the Russian leaders. Let us not forget, Trump’s favorite leaders are dictators. He ranks the Egyptian leader as his favorite.  

 

Unless the House and Senate develop good leadership qualities, per haps by looking in the history of their institutions, The Legislative branch will become the lackey of the president. During the early stages of the Roman Empire, Tiberius referred to Senators as “men fit for slaves.”

 

(Copyright of this article is owned by Michael Streich. No reprints or reproduction of any kind without written permission)