Check into the ex mayor of Prince Rupert,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he served about 40 years continuously and apparently the populace was happy with him.
Term Limits
- Thread starter YukonJack
- Start date
Check into the ex mayor of Prince Rupert,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he served about 40 years continuously and apparently the populace was happy with him.
And how are you going to enforce that? The only term limits in existence, for the presidency, came under fire from Republicans, since that meant that Reagan could not run for the third term. Those who clamour for term limits are for the most part politically motivated, nothing more.
Same as throw the bums out moment is politically motivated. Now that Republicans are in the minority, they may be for term limits (that would mean more democrats than Republicans losing their seats), they may be all for throwing the bums out (again, more democrats than Republicans lose their seats).
When Republicans come back into power again, all these so called movements will disappear. Indeed, I don't recall any clamour for term limits during the 12 years that Republicans were in power. These term limits acolytes were strangely silent when Tom Delay, Dick Army etc. served many more than two terms. Clamour for term limits started as soon as Democrats won the control of the Congress.
It is all politics.
I foyu really want to see what happens under strict term limits, please go to California and study what has happened to that State over the last 25 years.
It went from one of the best operated states, with one of the best educational systems, to one of the worst and it is now bankrupt. The legislators do not have a clue how to run a government, and the permanent staff (primarily Union people) actually run everything.
It would be a complete and total disaster to attempt to impose term limits. They have not helped anywhere that they have been imposed.
As usual, the "quick and easy" fix is exactly the wrong thing to do.
But ti won't happen anyway. In order to get term limits for Congress, you would have to get 2/3 of the members of the House and Senate to vote for an amendment to the Constitution, and then get the legislators of 3/4 of the states to vote for that amendment. It isn't going to happen.
It went from one of the best operated states, with one of the best educational systems, to one of the worst and it is now bankrupt. The legislators do not have a clue how to run a government, and the permanent staff (primarily Union people) actually run everything.
It would be a complete and total disaster to attempt to impose term limits. They have not helped anywhere that they have been imposed.
As usual, the "quick and easy" fix is exactly the wrong thing to do.
But ti won't happen anyway. In order to get term limits for Congress, you would have to get 2/3 of the members of the House and Senate to vote for an amendment to the Constitution, and then get the legislators of 3/4 of the states to vote for that amendment. It isn't going to happen.
Even if he's doing a good job and the people want him to stay? How can we defend that within the context of the democratic freedom of the electors to elect whom they wish?
Oh and Roosevelt did NOT serve 4 terms. He was ELECTED 4 times, but was already dying during his last campaign (this has been proven from records maintained at his Presidential library). He died less than 3 months after that last inauguration.
No President prior to FDR had ever even tried to serve more than 2 terms. Not one. The closest was his cousin, Teddy Roosevelt, who served one and a half, went out of office, and then challenged his hand picked successor and ushered the Democrats into office just before World War I, by splitting the Republican vote (if he hadn't run against Taft, Taft would have won hands down.) The reason why the amendments was passed, by 2/3 of the vote of each house of congress (including many democrats by the way) and then was ratified by 3/4 of the States, was that no one wanted to ever see another person decide that they were the "necessary leader" in the US again.
It took a LOT of Democrats to actually pass that amendment to the Constitution.
And Ronald Regan had no desire to run for another term. Only a few diehards fools were actually trying to promote that. He didn't want it, and told them to shut up.
No President prior to FDR had ever even tried to serve more than 2 terms. Not one. The closest was his cousin, Teddy Roosevelt, who served one and a half, went out of office, and then challenged his hand picked successor and ushered the Democrats into office just before World War I, by splitting the Republican vote (if he hadn't run against Taft, Taft would have won hands down.) The reason why the amendments was passed, by 2/3 of the vote of each house of congress (including many democrats by the way) and then was ratified by 3/4 of the States, was that no one wanted to ever see another person decide that they were the "necessary leader" in the US again.
It took a LOT of Democrats to actually pass that amendment to the Constitution.
And Ronald Regan had no desire to run for another term. Only a few diehards fools were actually trying to promote that. He didn't want it, and told them to shut up.