By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at [email protected] and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

Repealing the 22nd Amendment

Discussion in 'News' started by imported_grim540, Jun 18, 2005.

  1. imported_grim540

    imported_grim540 Member

    Joined: Jul 16, 2001 Messages: 465 Likes Received: 0
    Thursday night I heard a little blurb on coast to coast about people looking into repealing the 22 second amendment, which limits presidents to two terms. Now its late and I only had time to do a little research on it, but I was curious to see if anyone on here has heard about this.

    could be nothing....but is this the beginning of the reign of king george?

    HJ RES 24 the bill itself
  2. mentor

    mentor New Jack

    Joined: Jun 6, 2005 Messages: 37 Likes Received: 0
    i dont think it will occur but at this point i wouldnt even be suprised....good looking on the article
  3. <KEY3>

    <KEY3> Veteran Member

    Joined: Mar 24, 2004 Messages: 6,878 Likes Received: 2
    even the most die hard bush supporters would have to know that it's a bad idea.
    Hell.... if it wasn't for that regulation, Bush wouldn't have beten Gore, he would have gotten served by Clinton.
  4. fermentor666

    fermentor666 Veteran Member

    Joined: Sep 27, 2003 Messages: 8,152 Likes Received: 15
    Well, really the only thing holding back the hands up Bush's ass from rigging the next election is the amendment in place that's making it impossible for him to run for another term. Once that's out of the way it's a dynasty, baby. The cards are in, the game is fixed.

    ERIZENO Senior Member

    Joined: Jun 30, 2003 Messages: 1,999 Likes Received: 28
    His approval rating is at one of the lowest points ever, even other republicans seem to be turning on him. The approval of the war is super low ... it’s not looking good ...I doubt he will try that. I see them abusing the fact he can’t get re-elected to do things that suite their pocketbooks but upset the public; after all this is about money and power via money, not politics. The political side is just a guise to keep the public arguing over stupid shit while they swindle our money right out from under us.
  6. the ugly duckling

    the ugly duckling Junior Member

    Joined: May 5, 2005 Messages: 101 Likes Received: 0
    even if they somehow got away with repealing the 22nd amendment, i really doubt that bush would be re-elected.
  7. angelofdeath

    angelofdeath Elite Member

    Joined: Sep 15, 2002 Messages: 4,375 Likes Received: 79
    i would seriously laugh my ass off if he did get re-elected. this amendment will pass just like the "arnold" amendment. never.
  8. GnomeToys

    GnomeToys Elite Member

    Joined: Jun 24, 2003 Messages: 2,616 Likes Received: 4
    It doesn't matter what his supporters think, if whoever rigged the first two elections gets this bullshit passed, we're all fucked.
  9. dumy

    dumy Veteran Member

    Joined: Oct 8, 2004 Messages: 5,056 Likes Received: 0
    so true..
  10. Smart

    Smart Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Apr 14, 2000 Messages: 17,017 Likes Received: 178
    They talk about this pretty frequently... They talked about it for Regan, Clinton and now Bush... not so much w/ Bush 1 but... It's been about 4 years since I last heard this spoken of but I think... let's see, what was it... Maybe it was said that the repeal will limit the president to two consecutive terms and allow him to run again after someone else has a chance... or that's what the original document said or???

    Ah... here's some stuff from:
    Some political page...

    Term limits
    George Washington, the first President of the United States, is often said to have established the tradition of limiting service as President to two terms only. His Farewell Address, however, suggests that it was because of his age that he did not seek re-election. More accurately, one may suggest that Thomas Jefferson established the convention of a two-term limit; he noted, "if some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life". Jefferson’s immediate successors, James Madison and James Monroe, also adhered to the two-term principle.

    Few Presidents attempted to serve for more than two terms. Ulysses S. Grant sought a third term in office after serving from 1869 to 1877, but his party failed to nominate him. Theodore Roosevelt, who served from 1901 to 1909, sought to be elected in 1912 (non-consecutively) for a second time—he had succeeded to the presidency on William McKinley's assassination and already been elected in 1904 to a full term himself—but he lost to Woodrow Wilson. In 1940 Franklin Delano Roosevelt became the first person to be elected President three times, with supporters citing the war in Europe as a reason for breaking with precedent. In the 1944 election, during World War II, he won a fourth term, but died in office the following year.

    After Franklin Roosevelt's death, many desired to establish a firm constitutional provision barring presidents from being elected more than twice. The rationale was a concern that without limits, the presidential position could become too similar to that of a benevolent dictator lasting not just four years but a lifetime, that the position could become too powerful and upset the separation of powers, and even so powerful that elections would become dispensable. Hence, the Twenty-second Amendment was adopted.

    Under the amendment, no person may be elected president more than twice. Furthermore, no vice president or other person who has succeeded to the presidency, and served as president or acting president for more than two years, may be elected president more than once. Consequently, the amendment, while limiting a person to two elected four-year terms as president, theoretically does allow a person to serve up to ten years in office. If a person serving as vice president succeeds to the presidency, and serves for less than two years of the original president's term, he or she may still be elected twice and thus serve a total of ten full years in office.

    Application of amendment
    As of 2005, of the ten presidents to take office since the amendment was ratified, five have reached the limit of their eligibility for election: Dwight Eisenhower (served two full terms), Richard Nixon (elected twice consecutively, but resigned in second term), Ronald Reagan (served two full terms), Bill Clinton (served two full terms), and George W. Bush (served one full term and is currently serving the second). All except Bill Clinton were Republicans. The only president, as of 2005, to have been eligible to serve more than eight years under the amendment was Lyndon Johnson. Johnson succeeded to the presidency following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and served less than two years of Kennedy's term (14 of 48 months). Had he stayed in the 1968 race and won, he could have been in office for over nine years.

    Some have questioned the interpretation of the Twenty-second Amendment as it relates to the Twelfth Amendment. The Twelfth Amendment provides that anyone constitutionally ineligible to the office of President is ineligible to that of Vice President. Clearly, the original constitutional qualifications (age, citizenship and residency) apply under the Twelfth Amendment to both the President and Vice President. It is unclear, however, if a two-term President could later be elected—or appointed—Vice President. Some argue that the Twenty-second Amendment and Twelfth Amendment bar any two-term President from later serving as Vice President and from succeeding to the Presidency from any point in the line of succession. Others suggest that the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election. No two-term President has later sought to become Vice President since the ratification of the Twenty-Second Amendment; thus, the courts have never had an opportunity to decide the question.

    Criticism of amendment
    Former U.S. president Bill Clinton has recently voiced his opinion in favor of modifications to the 22nd Amendment. According to Mr. Clinton, former presidents who have already served two terms should be allowed to run for the office again, after some interim period has passed. He reasoned the country may wish to trust leadership onto an already tried and proven candidate in times of great need. Sherman Adams quotes Dwight Eisenhower expressing in a press conference his strong opposition to term limits: "The United States ought to be able to choose for its President anybody it wants, regardless of the number of terms he has served" ("First Hand Report", 1961, p. 296). Both Clinton and Eisenhower were affected by the 22nd Amendment, as they each served two terms.

    Frequent attempts have been made, in recent years one or more per session of Congress, to modify or repeal the 22nd Amendment; none has yet been successful.

    So... anyway, as it was said, Bush's popularity is in the crapper... he won't be able to win again as interest rates rise and support for the war (or simply war spending) falls... In fact I think it's gonna be much tougher for the Republicans to field a contender... MAYBE Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice, but their are considered pretty liberal Republicans by the far right powerbase of the conservatives. She's Pro-Choice and He's a self-described "fiscal conservative and social liberal" (Basically the clarion call of Libertatians ((Why yes, I am a Libertarian, thanks for noticing)))...

    Back on point, don't expect a repeal very soon, more likely a legalization (or decriminalization) of marijuana...
  11. Nutonce

    Nutonce Member

    Joined: Oct 31, 2001 Messages: 786 Likes Received: 0
    the beginning of the end.
  12. SteveAustin

    SteveAustin Veteran Member

    Joined: Mar 12, 2002 Messages: 7,042 Likes Received: 2
    interesting read, smart.

    I had made the joke "W" was going to repeal it right after he fixed the last election.