Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sly
I just noticed this.
Contrary to popular belief, a President can not snap his fingers and BAM something happens. If that were the case, don't you think every President would be making changes a lot quicker than what they do? These things take time. We have Checks and Balances in place to stop any one person from having too much power. The scenario you're speaking of would grant that one too much power.
I like the 6 year term Lenny mentioned. Not only would it give the President more time to get things accomplished, it would also eliminate the "burden" of getting reelected. But then again, a 6 year term just may grant too much power.
|
Sly, you're being very shortsighted and you're basing the future and possible changes on the current system. A two year term with no term limits would essentially change the way in which our voting system works too. In fact it would require a radical change of many sytems, processes and standards.
You're right, this single change would be chaotic under the current structure however, many things would have to change. I believe that this would be a closer to ideal situation for all Americans.
Change is good yet if you have an effective leader in place it doesn't make sense to make their departure after two 4 year terms a mandatory issue. At the same rate history has shown that sometimes the right leader is not elected, you sometimes don't know that ahead of time and rather than displeasure and possible fallout as a result a shorter term would require astute decision making and faster change.