by Stephen A. Wait ~ 30th of January, 2023
Term limits; the antithesis to the lucrative lure of a career in politics. Thus, I propose the following draft as amendment to the Constitution of the United States via Article V.
Section 1. The citizenry shall elect from their own, those of eligibility, to serve as transitory agents of governance; in non-consecutive terms and without repetition of office, except as otherwise provided in the Constitution. The idle term shall be considered equal that held prior.
Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution.
Notes regarding the proposed amendment:
For clarity, an amendment of this nature serves as an explicit constraint on political ambition by means of term fragmentation and itinerant authority. Yet should any individual possess a genuine desire for repeated public service, the regularity of shifting political winds helps ensure the weeding out of all but the most sincere.
e.g., An individual might run, be elected, and serve a two-year term in the House of Representatives. Subsequently, for two years the individual would not be eligible to run for Federal elected office. Upon expiration of this idle term, the individual could again run, be elected, and serve in a differing capacity, perhaps this time in the Senate. Once the active term is complete, the idle term requirement is imposed and in this case after six years the individual could choose perhaps to pursue the Presidency.
Among other things, one may notice that not only does Section 1. of the proposed amendment reinforce that Citizens alone enjoy the right to vote, but that candidates too must possess citizenship. Also, in Section 1. of the proposed is the necessary accommodation for the Executive as stipulated by Section 1. of the 22nd Amendment. And, with particular intention is Section 2. of the proposed. Here, as with Section 3 of the 21st Amendment, exists the provision of utmost proximity for the People in this concern.
~
I reject the opinion of those suggesting political experience a requisite navigational tool for governance. Their notion of the “politically naïve” being of increased susceptibility to influence peddlers and the like — bunk! And the implication that without an incentive of self-serving interest, those thought “best equipped” would forego an opportunity to “serve”; it is here my case is made. Those who think the conscientious, the competent, the average American Citizen who possesses integrity and genuine concern for their country, are incapable of honorable participation in governance… they then are the naïve. We stand in desperate need of those who possess a natural immunity to the panacea of big government. And with a little help in limiting their exposure to the temptations of corruption, perhaps a first step toward saving ourselves can be taken.
…
Regarding Comments in reply to postings and the Submissions of Opinion: 1) With deliberative appraisal, you are invited to expand on, offer anew, or debate the merits of an argument. 2) In the spirit of Mr. Hancock, as expressed in today’s vernacular, you must own it! As public discourse is weakened by the masquerade of internet anonymity, an attribution of true identity (both given and surname) is required ~ i.e., pseudonyms may not be used. 3) Disingenuous commentary will be rejected.
