Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits

Article 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Article 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

In 1947, the United States Congress engaged in an act that rivaled the deposition of Pope Formosus in its wrongness. Figuratively digging up the corpse of FDR, it passed what would become the Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution, in order to guarantee that no President could ever ignore the precedent by George Washington. It was, in my eyes, an unwise move, and one contrary to the spirit of our founding document. Indeed, the limitation has been repeatedly criticized by later presidents, historians and political scientists as undemocratic and creating the problem of a lame duck presidency from the first day of the second term.

Which leads us to 2008.

At this time, one of the major candidates for president is the wife of a former president. Hillary Clinton has unleashed her husband, former president Bill Clinton, as a surrogate for her on the campaign trail due to his effectiveness as a campaigner and continued popularity nearly eight years after he left office. Indeed, we are once again hearing the “two for one” rhetoric of the 1992 campaign, with this being seen as one of Hillary Clinton’s qualifications for office.

But this begs the real question – do Americans wish to see Hillary Clinton elected President, or are they really pining after Bill Clinton? And if so, why should the American people be forced to settle for Hillary – an abrasive figure who lacks he husbands charisma and actual experience in office?

Personally, I believe “We, the People” should not be required to settle for a substitute when the real thing is available. If the American people believe that Bill Clinton is the most qualified individual to lead our country in these times, the American people should have the right to have him take the reigns for a third term – and a fourth or fifth if that is the popular will.

Of course, I find the notion of allowing either Clinton in the White House to be nauseating. I would actively campaign against him were he running, as I fully intend to do with his wife. But if my fellow citizens would prefer him in office to any other American, I will gladly bend to their will – and would feel safer with him running the country than I would with his wife. So let’s act, after the election, if not now, to eliminate the Republican’s revenge on the deceased Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The Twenty-Second Amendment should be repealed.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, A Newt One- The Truth Surge, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Nuke Gingrich, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Wolf Pangloss, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.