The XXII Amendment

[mamboman]

Dont know if this GD, IMHO or GQ, but I was curious - if a US president so desired, how easy or hard or impossible would it be for him to have the XXII Amendment repealed? What would he have to do and what are the chances of such a move being successful?

mm

[Jonathan Chance]

Well, the President, per se, couldn't do it at all.

The procedure is very straightforward. Congress passes an amendment. Voila. then 3/4 of the state legislatures need to vote to approve that amendment. When that happens it's pretty much done.

Of course it's only happened a handful of times in 229 years.

[Derleth]

The only way to repeal an amendment is with a different amendment, like how the XXIth repealed the XVIIIth (Prohibition).

[Derleth]

XXIthTwenty-firth of forth. ;)

XXIst!

[Frank]

If an amendment were passed to repeal the 22nd, the chances are excellent that it would be specifically written to exclude the sitting president, just as the 22nd was.

[zev_steinhardt]

If an amendment were passed to repeal the 22nd, the chances are excellent that it would be specifically written to exclude the sitting president, just as the 22nd was.

Why would you say that?

If the 22nd were repealed, it would allow anyone who is otherwise eligible to run for president. That would include Bill Clinton. Assuming George W. Bush is in office when the 28th passes (repealing the 22nd), why should he be treated any worse than Bill Clinton? Why should *one* person be excluded from running for the presidency by a constitutional amendment?

Zev Steinhardt

[Frank]

Why should *one* person be excluded from running for the presidency by a constitutional amendment?
Otherwise it would seem too blatantly purposed to allow the current president to run a third time. I don't think an amendment would pass under those circumstances. The 22nd was a reaction to Roosevelt, but specifically excluded Truman in order not to seem aimed at him.

[Lemur866]

But repealing the 22nd Amendment is a non-starter for the reason that Zev mentioned...Bill Clinton. You think the Republicans want to see a George W. Bush vs Bill Clinton matchup in 2008? Not gonna happen as long as Bill Clinton is alive.

[zev_steinhardt]

Otherwise it would seem too blatantly purposed to allow the current president to run a third time. I don't think an amendment would pass under those circumstances. The 22nd was a reaction to Roosevelt, but specifically excluded Truman in order not to seem aimed at him.

I understand that, but it still seems horribly inappropriate to have an amendment that only prevents one person in the entire world from being president.

How about a compromise... the incumbent when the amendment is passed can't serve more than two *consecutive* terms when the amendment passes (although, after sitting out a term, he can run again as many times, just like anyone else)?

Zev Steinhardt

[zev_steinhardt]

But repealing the 22nd Amendment is a non-starter for the reason that Zev mentioned...Bill Clinton. You think the Republicans want to see a George W. Bush vs Bill Clinton matchup in 2008? Not gonna happen as long as Bill Clinton is alive.

I don't know about that. I've often said that I'd be willing to repeal the 22nd, even if it meant a third Clinton term (and I am *definitely* not a Clinton supporter).

Zev Steinhardt

[Lemur866]

I don't know about that. I've often said that I'd be willing to repeal the 22nd, even if it meant a third Clinton term (and I am *definitely* not a Clinton supporter).

Zev Steinhardt

Yes, but you're more interested in fairness than Republican domination. But a constitutional amendment needs broad support, 2/3 vote in the house, 2/3 vote in the Senate, and 3/4 of the state legislatures ratifying. There's going to be a solid core of Republicans in the House, Senate and State Legislatures that will consider the amendment, remember Bill Clinton, and shudder in terror at the thought of a 3rd term.

Yes, passing the Amendment would allow George W. Bush to run for a third term (assuming no language to prevent it). The only time this amendment could be passed is when neither party sees a huge advantage to the other party. As long as Bill Clinton is around the Republicans will oppose the amendment, even if it means St. George the Good won't get the third term he deserves.

I know this is still GQ, but the OP did ask: "How easy or hard or impossible would it be for him to have the XXII Amendment repealed? What would he have to do and what are the chances of such a move being successful?"

[Frank]

How about a compromise... the incumbent when the amendment is passed can't serve more than two *consecutive* terms when the amendment passes (although, after sitting out a term, he can run again as many times, just like anyone else)?
I'd accept that.