Term-limits were put into place for US Presidents because of FDR. Have
we reached the era when they should be abolished? It is unfortunate
that Bill Clinton could not run against GW Bush instead of Kerry,
because he is probably the only candidate who could have beaten him.

Should term-limits be lifted from the US Presidency?

If not, should a former 2-term President be allowed to run again if he
takes a 4 year break?

Should there be term limits for US Senators and Reps?

"Milton Hurley" wrote in
news
Term-limits were put into place for US Presidents because of FDR.
Have we reached the era when they should be abolished? It is
unfortunate that Bill Clinton could not run against GW Bush
instead of Kerry, because he is probably the only candidate who
could have beaten him.

Should term-limits be lifted from the US Presidency?

No

If not, should a former 2-term President be allowed to run again
if he takes a 4 year break?

Yes, that sounds fair. In NYC, the Mayor is only allowed to serve two
*consecutive* terms. After a leave from office, he is free to run
again.

Should there be term limits for US Senators and Reps?

Absolutely. 2 consecutive terms each.

ttp://groups-beta.google.com/groups?enc_author=mSvM8Q4AAAChT13F101subA4Pg2M9h9f

http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...QD8LSSMixGwCeA

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 03:56:45 +0000 (UTC), Milton Hurley
wrote:
Term-limits were put into place for US Presidents because of FDR. Have
we reached the era when they should be abolished? It is unfortunate
that Bill Clinton could not run against GW Bush instead of Kerry,
because he is probably the only candidate who could have beaten him.


Kerry v Clinton? Idda Loved t'see that 'un.

Th'way OI figgurs ut, any wut Wants a job loik that oughter be kept
Far'way from Warshington DC as possible. Mebbe put 'em on an air force
base up in Nome er summought.

Mebbe "fergit" t'send 'em lawnjohns tew . .

Let summwon wut dinnae NEVER wan sewch a job an givvut t'im 'er 'er.
Mebbe me Missus would dew a job. Does well 'nuff wif MOI loisy arse, oi
s'pose.

Naw lemme git meself back uppa hollar. Got some cullwood Oi needs to
"dispose of proper" . . . by burnin' ut in me still.

"Milton Hurley" wrote in message
news
Term-limits were put into place for US Presidents because of FDR. Have
we reached the era when they should be abolished? It is unfortunate
that Bill Clinton could not run against GW Bush instead of Kerry,
because he is probably the only candidate who could have beaten him.

Bush would have beat Clinton. I did hear a pundit suggest that Al would be
wise to pick Bill as his running mate. That would have been legal. The Bill
would bumped off Al...

INHO We're better off with Bill gone and Al gone.

Should term-limits be lifted from the US Presidency?

No.

If not, should a former 2-term President be allowed to run again if he
takes a 4 year break?

He/She already is. Look it up! Although most are too retired after 12 years.

Should there be term limits for US Senators and Reps?

Yes. Senators get two terms (12 years) and Reps get 4 terms (8 years).

Andy
Vote Rice/Powell in 2008!

Charles Krug notes:

Th'way OI figgurs ut, any wut Wants a job loik that oughter be kept
Far'way from Warshington DC as possible. Mebbe put 'em on an air force

base up in Nome er summought.


Mebbe "fergit" t'send 'em lawnjohns tew . .


Let summwon wut dinnae NEVER wan sewch a job an givvut t'im 'er 'er.
Mebbe me Missus would dew a job. Does well 'nuff wif MOI loisy arse,
oi
s'pose.


Naw lemme git meself back uppa hollar. Got some cullwood Oi needs to
"dispose of proper" . . . by burnin' ut in me still.

Simple cure make a mandatory jail sentence a part of the election
process. Anyone who runs for national office gets to spend half the
elected term in a maximum security prison before taking office.

In article , "Andy" wrote:
Bush would have beat Clinton. I did hear a pundit suggest that Al would be
wise to pick Bill as his running mate. That would have been legal.

False. Having served two full terms as President, Clinton is no longer
constitutionally eligible to be President again (Amendment 22) and therefore
is ineligible to be Vice President either (Amendment 12).

[snip]

If not, should a former 2-term President be allowed to run again if he
takes a 4 year break?

He/She already is. Look it up! Although most are too retired after 12 years.

False, again. *You* need to "look it up".

Amendment XXII

Section 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.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxii.html

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "Andy" wrote:


False. Having served two full terms as President, Clinton is no longer
constitutionally eligible to be President again (Amendment 22) and therefore
is ineligible to be Vice President either (Amendment 12).
..

Amendment XXII

Section 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.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxii.html

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Doug,

I'm no lawyer, so there is probably some one (probably a plethora of
someones) who knows more than I on this topic, but I see nothing above
that would preclude Clinton (God forbid) from running as VP. As I read
the 22nd, it uses the word "elected" president. I also re-read the
12th, but could not see how that would apply.

Could you explain it a bit more clearly so I can understand exactly what
would preclude his running (other than good taste).

Glen

In article et, wrote:

I'm no lawyer, so there is probably some one (probably a plethora of
someones) who knows more than I on this topic, but I see nothing above
that would preclude Clinton (God forbid) from running as VP. As I read
the 22nd, it uses the word "elected" president. I also re-read the
12th, but could not see how that would apply.

You might have missed it. Amendment 12 is kind of long-winded, and it's in the
very last sentence:

"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be
eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

And thus, since by Amendment 22, Clinton is no longer eligible to be
President, then by Amendment 12, he is not eligible to be Vice President
either.

Could you explain it a bit more clearly so I can understand exactly what
would preclude his running (other than good taste).

Technically, I guess nothing could stop him from *running*. But Amendment 12
certainly prohibits him from being *inaugurated*.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug,

It does say "elected". It doesn't say they can't "inherit" the office.

Your right about the rest.

Andy

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
m...
In article , "Andy"
wrote:
Bush would have beat Clinton. I did hear a pundit suggest that Al would be
wise to pick Bill as his running mate. That would have been legal.

False. Having served two full terms as President, Clinton is no longer
constitutionally eligible to be President again (Amendment 22) and
therefore
is ineligible to be Vice President either (Amendment 12).

[snip]

If not, should a former 2-term President be allowed to run again if he
takes a 4 year break?

He/She already is. Look it up! Although most are too retired after 12
years.

False, again. *You* need to "look it up".

Amendment XXII

Section 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.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxii.html

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:01:39 -0700, Andy wrote:
Doug,

It does say "elected". It doesn't say they can't "inherit" the office.

How does 'inherited' enter into anything, Andy?

In article ,
says...

Technically, I guess nothing could stop him from *running*. But Amendment 12
certainly prohibits him from being *inaugurated*.

Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Darn it Doug, you're posting altogether too many lucid, correct, and
succint messages :-).

Now if you could just ..... Naah.

--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description

Note follow-ups. Note also this thread was initiated and seconded
by a troll who never posted anything previously to UseNet under
the same usernames.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article et,
wrote:

I'm no lawyer, so there is probably some one (probably a plethora of

someones) who knows more than I on this topic, but I see nothing
above
that would preclude Clinton (God forbid) from running as VP. As I
read
the 22nd, it uses the word "elected" president. I also re-read the
12th, but could not see how that would apply.

You might have missed it. Amendment 12 is kind of long-winded, and
it's in the
very last sentence:

"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President
shall be
eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

And thus, since by Amendment 22, Clinton is no longer eligible to be
President, then by Amendment 12, he is not eligible to be Vice
President
either.

He may, however, ascend to the Presidency through the line of succesion
should he be Speaker of the House upon the simultaneous death of the
President and Vice President even though he cannot be elected to
either office.

The same prohibition that appears in Amendment 12 regarding election
does not appear in the later amendment providing for succession.
Probably NOT an oversight as, should both the President and Vice
President be simultaneously removed from office that would probably
occur during a national crisis in which it would be inadvisable to
pass over a person experienced as President in favor of someone
not so experienced.

Of course the precise wording of that sentence in Amendment 12
is not specific to election, but since the entire Amendment IS
specific to election one can reasonable infer that it applies
to election only and not to succession.

However, as a practical matter that issue will most likely never
arise as former Presidents seldom seek another office. The last
President to do so, that I can think of was Taft, who used the
Presidency as a stepping stone to realize his ambition to become
Chief Justice of the USSC. Befor Taft, John Quincy Adams had a
long career in the Congress after serving as President.


Could you explain it a bit more clearly so I can understand exactly
what
would preclude his running (other than good taste).

Technically, I guess nothing could stop him from *running*. But
Amendment 12
certainly prohibits him from being *inaugurated*.

I'd say it prohibits the Electoral College from voting for him for
either office, and should any electors do so, it would prohibit the
Congress from accepting those votes.

--

FF

In article , "Andy" wrote:
Doug,

It does say "elected". It doesn't say they can't "inherit" the office.

To "inherit" the office ("succeed" would actually be the proper term), one
would need to be Vice President first, no? And by Amendment 12, anyone not
eligible to be President is not eligible to be VP either.

Your right about the rest.

Actually, if you read *all* of Amendment 22, and *all* of Amendment 12, you'll
see that I'm right about *all* of what I said.

Andy

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
om...
In article , "Andy"
wrote:
Bush would have beat Clinton. I did hear a pundit suggest that Al would be
wise to pick Bill as his running mate. That would have been legal.

False. Having served two full terms as President, Clinton is no longer
constitutionally eligible to be President again (Amendment 22) and
therefore
is ineligible to be Vice President either (Amendment 12).

[snip]

If not, should a former 2-term President be allowed to run again if he
takes a 4 year break?

He/She already is. Look it up! Although most are too retired after 12
years.

False, again. *You* need to "look it up".

Amendment XXII

Section 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.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxxii.html

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?



--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
m...
In article , "Andy"
wrote:
Doug,

It does say "elected". It doesn't say they can't "inherit" the office.

To "inherit" the office ("succeed" would actually be the proper term), one
would need to be Vice President first, no? And by Amendment 12, anyone not
eligible to be President is not eligible to be VP either.
of time?

Hmmm...I wonder if he could be elected to the US House, become Speaker, then
the President and VP are killed in office, whereby the Speaker assumes the
responsibililites of President. Let's just say that if Clinton were to
become Speaker of the House, the President and VP would never even be in the
same state...

todd

In article , "Todd Fatheree" wrote:
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
om...
In article , "Andy"
wrote:
Doug,

It does say "elected". It doesn't say they can't "inherit" the office.

To "inherit" the office ("succeed" would actually be the proper term), one
would need to be Vice President first, no? And by Amendment 12, anyone not
eligible to be President is not eligible to be VP either.
of time?

Hmmm...I wonder if he could be elected to the US House, become Speaker, then
the President and VP are killed in office, whereby the Speaker assumes the
responsibililites of President.

No. The Federal law (3 USC 19) establishing the line of succession is quite
clear upon that point: anyone not eligible, under the Constitution, to be
President is not eligible to succeed to the office.

http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/19.html

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Note follow-ups.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "Todd Fatheree"
wrote:
"Doug Miller" wrote in message
om...
In article , "Andy"
wrote:
Doug,

It does say "elected". It doesn't say they can't "inherit" the
office.

To "inherit" the office ("succeed" would actually be the proper
term), one
would need to be Vice President first, no? And by Amendment 12,
anyone not
eligible to be President is not eligible to be VP either.
of time?

Hmmm...I wonder if he could be elected to the US House, become
Speaker, then
the President and VP are killed in office, whereby the Speaker
assumes the
responsibililites of President.

No. The Federal law (3 USC 19) establishing the line of succession is
quite
clear upon that point: anyone not eligible, under the Constitution,
to be
President is not eligible to succeed to the office.

http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/19.html


That link got cut off, I think this is what you mean:

http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/usc...9----000-.html

Oddly enough, I cannot find a provision in the Constitution which
authorizes
the Congress to provide for the eventuality that both the Presidency
and
Vice Presidentcy are simultaneously vacant. Amendment 20 addresses the
death of Presidential or Vice Presidential Candidates when either
office
is to be decided by those respective houses.

And read Amendment 22 again:

Amendment XXII

Section 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. ...

(Emphasis mine)

Undeniably Clinton is COnstitutionally ineligible to be ELECTED
President, (or VP per Amendment 12). He is not by Amendment 22
ineligible to serve as President through application of the
line of succession.

--

FF