Should the presidential term be extended to 6 years?

1. 60

   IDONOposted 13 years ago

   Should the presidential term be extended to 6 years?
   
   I keep hearing that a president needs two terms to really get something going. If true, and we don't want a term to be 8 years because that is too long and a failing president could cause far too much damage in that amount of time, would a 6 year term be an answer? Pros and cons.

   replyreport
2. 70

   lburmasterposted 13 years ago

   Definately not. We already have to keep the presidents for 4 years. That is bad enough. If we adore a president, he will get re-elected.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      IDONOposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      OK.  I just don't like the idea that he spends one of those 4 years trying to get re-elected. Seems kind of wasteful.

      replyreport
   2. 70

      lburmasterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Yes. But what a president does is in the system for the next 25 years after his election into office. Just 4 years changes a lot.

      replyreport
3. 61

   darklandposted 13 years ago

   Actually I think it should be shortened to 6 months. You're right the election process is stupid and wasteful, but I don't think extending the term will make that any better

   replyreport
4. 67

   Sue St. Clairposted 13 years ago

   Your question is one that constitutional writers have considered. The Constitution for the Confederate States limited the President to one six-year term, the Constitution for the Republic of Texas limited the President to non-sequential terms in office. These Constitutions which both came after the United States Constitution considered the problem that you raise. Each of them provided potential solutions to Chief Executives spending too much time campaigning. The problems were noted in previous generations, which came up with their own answers.
   
   Each of these nations were short-lived, so in terms of knowing the long-term impact of the changes, we are in the dark. We can speculate on what may happen, but it will all be guesswork.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      darklandposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, that was very informative, it's always interesting to see that past generations had relativity the same thoughts, feelings, and problems.

      replyreport
5. 0

   Old Empresarioposted 13 years ago

   I would say a 6-year term with a limit of only one term is a good idea. Why not? The founding fathers originally toyed with the idea and the confederate government was established along those lines. Every incumbent wins the election anyway and gets 8 years. Another thing--who cares if a president can't get anything "done"? They've "done" quite enough. They aren't supposed to do anything anyway. Congress is supposed to create the legislation and come up with the ideas. The 2-term limit that was established in the 1950s has brainwashed every politician into thinking that a president who does not fullfill the maximim of 2 terms is a failure. When there was no limit, many president took pride in the fact that they only ran for 1 term of service. Now such an idea makes a president look weak and he has no choice. Term limits are dumb. Either have a limit of only 1 term or have no limit. But don't set a bar to which politicians must aspire. It hurts us all.

   replyreport