Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Jeff T
Lv 6
Jeff T asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

Do you think we should change the Presidency to one six-year term?

One term, that's it. That way, once a person becomes President, he can stop campaigning and start governing?

Instead of the President turning the Super Bowl pre-game into his own personal stump speech?

If you disagree with the six years part, but agree with the one term only part, how long would you make the term?

Update:

Sounds like most of the opposition is to the idea of "six" years.

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Jimmy Carter suggested that, perhaps because he had a hunch he might not win re-election. It was not a popular idea when he proposed it and I doubt that it will ever be. George W Bush, when he knew he cannot run for another term, proposed such brilliant ideas as privatizing Social Security. It was the start of his downfall. Imagine what may happen under a single 6 year term, someone like Bush, who was put in the White House by the Supreme Court, can pretty much do anything he wanted, since he did not have to worry about re-election. Given 6 long years, he might have been able to dismantle Social Security, Medicare, the Endangered Species Act and perhaps the minimum wage. Not a good idea at all.

  • ?
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    That's actually a pretty good idea. I feel with the changes made to the election of senators, we should also give them two-year terms like representatives.

    Still, I think the end of the president's term would still be a waste, because most presidents are party guys to the core, and they would just spend 2 years campaigning for the guy they want to succeed them.

  • Mathew
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    No.

    Four years is enough time so that the person in the office isn't running for re-election right as soon as he wins the office, but not long enough to make him feel invulnerable to the will of the people.

    I oppose term limits (such as "one term" or "a maximum of 10 years") because that limits the options available to the citizens. Our Constitution currently limits the Presidency to 10 years for any one person.

  • Bethy
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    How about 1 four year term and 1 two year term

    The fact that they face an election keeps them very honest

    They want to win

    You remove it and they will govern from their ideological corner for the entire term

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Sounds like it might be a good idea, but wouldn't it take a constitutional amendment? I think it would, and that's a tough road to hoe.

  • 1 decade ago

    Not if we still elect people like Obama. That would give him an extra two years as POTUS which is unacceptable.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Not a terribly bad idea, although the thought of 6 yrs of Obama makes me want to vomit

  • 1 decade ago

    Like Mexico? No.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    We would need to amend the Constitution, but I think it would be worth it.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    no because then obama would have more years to wreak havoc

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.