Bob

Not great, Bob.

Sunday, March 4, 2018

Forget the 25th Amendment



I'm sure most of you have read Trump's newest stated aspiration by now:

President Donald Trump bemoaned a decision not to investigate Hillary Clinton after the 2016 presidential election, decrying a "rigged system" that still doesn't have the "right people" in place to fix it, during a freewheeling speech to Republican donors in Florida on Saturday.
In the closed-door remarks, a recording of which was obtained by CNN, Trump also praised China's President Xi Jinping for recently consolidating power and extending his potential tenure, musing he wouldn't mind making such a maneuver himself.
"He's now president for life. President for life. No, he's great," Trump said. "And look, he was able to do that. I think it's great. Maybe we'll have to give that a shot some day."

There's been a lot of talk over the last year-plus of trying to remove Trump from office using the 25th Amendment. But I've been thinking about a different Amendment -- the 22nd:

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.

Specifically, I'm for abolishing it. Why is it there to begin with?

Near the end of the 1944 campaign, Thomas Dewey announced support of an amendment that would limit future presidents to two terms. According to Dewey, "four terms, or sixteen years (which is what Roosevelt would have served had he lived until 1949), is the most dangerous threat to our freedom ever proposed." The Republican-controlled 80th Congress approved a Joint resolution "proposing an amendment to the Constitution relating to the terms of office of the president". in March 1947; it was signed by Speaker of the House Joseph W. Martin and acting President pro tempore of the Senate William F. Knowland.


Trump wants to be President-for-Life? We'll have to amend the Constitution to supersede the 22nd. Well, why don't we get started on this early? I can think of someone else who could benefit from that:



Trump's ego is large enough that he'd expect to continue to win reelection, term after term. If he makes it to 2020, why don't we give him a chance to take on the guy whose legacy he's trying to destroy (but whose legacy he'll likely ultimately bolster)?

Who says no? The Democrats or the Republicans?

No comments:

Post a Comment