?
Favorite Answer
No .. Because that's not really long enough. They might be more amendable to one six year term.
glenbarrington
I think 2 four year terms is about right as a max. Long enough to get things done (if you're any good), but short enough to keep the executive branch from believing that they have some sort of divine right to the perks and the power.
Crede Sed Proba
only if you limit the others to one term
the term limit amendment is a problem point , we removed one check term limits for the president , without adjusting the balance , no term limits for the rest
we need to even it back out one way or the other, either term limits for all or none.
people point to kings as a argument for term limits but our bureaucrats have more power than any elected official they are there longer and have less accountability
Ravenwolf_mn
That wouldn't be smart. limiting any elected Official to just one term automatically make them a lame duck unaccountable to anyone. This would lead only to corruption on a grand scale, possibly even to dictatorship. A better Idea might be make ALL elections nonpartisan. Let everyone run on their laural instead of on a Party's coat tails.
Get out of my pocket!
The Presidential term is 4 years.
They are only allowed to run twice. (win twice)
I think you mean only allow 1 term total