Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on us constitutional reform
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on us constitutional reform
The United States has one of the best Constitutions that the world has seen, it has lasted through the years, through many different situations and it still survives to this day. One of the main benefits of our Constitution is that it is flexible, if our government finds it necessary, they can change and ratify the document to better govern our country. While many of our amendments have gone through change throughout the years, there is one that still needs to be changed. The 22nd amendment of the United States was ratified to combat anyone in the position as President from staying in office too long, thus giving them more power than they should have. While this was a good policy to enact it only enforced term limits on the President, not any of the other branches of government, even though these …show more content…
The House of Representatives voted 227-204 in favor of an amendment that would limit its own terms, in 1995. Unfortunately, even though the bill was able to get majority it did not get the 2/3 vote it needed, but it is a start. By knowing that this amendment could actually go through, voters can worry about other aspects of the legislation. The proposed term limits should not be any shorter than 10 years, as mentioned above this job has a learning curve, by allowing members to stay on for 10 or more years they would feel that they have enough time to get what they want done without the added benefit of staying indefinitely. The legislation would not go into effect immediacy, that is people who have been their past the term limit would not be automatically kicked out. The election cycle would still go on as planes, luckily voting for congress is in waves, so we do not replace every member at once. This gives the added benefit of allowing new members to spend time with experienced members and making sure the congress is not filled with inexperienced
It is not uncommon to find members of Congress who have genuine goals of spearheading, designing or even just supporting good public policy. It would be harsh to say that every member of Congress is against good policy. However what is difficult for members of Congress is deciding what is more important, the wishes of their constituents or national policy. Although it is rare, members of Congress vote against the popular opinion of his or her district in order to make what would be considered good policy in the national interest. This hinders their chance of re-election but is necessary for America. In very rare cases members of Congress have gone against the wishes of their constituents for moral reasons like in the aftermath of 9/11. When voting on the 2002 Iraq War Resolution, I am certain that the last thing of the minds of members of Congress was re-election. A very conservative House of Representatives member Jimmy Duncan said ‘‘when I pushed that button to vote against the war back in 2002, I thought I might be ending my political career.” In times of crisis members of Congress have decide between what is right, not what their constituents believe is right. Another goal other than re-election that members of Congress have is their own future. For many, being a members of The House of Representatives is a mere stepping stone in their career on the way to better things. Therefore for some members of Congress, re-election does not worry them and gives them the freedom to act in an environment striped of the constant pressure of re-election. However, considering that most of the members of The House Of Representatives goals lie within the Senate or high executive positions, re-election is still on their mind, all be it in the form of a different
Preventing federal judges to serve for life is a good concept, except when the judges become too old to continue presiding. Setting term limits for judges would be a great idea, because it would add diversity to the court systems every time a new judge arrives. Some judges are just too old, and senile, to still rule on cases and do their job effectively; therefore, setting term limits would ultimately benefit the courts because it would allow for diversity, and a new judge who may have different standards.
After the American Revolution, America had earned it’s freedom from Britain. In order to govern this new country the Articles of Confederation was created. This document was flawed by the colonists fear of putting too much power into a central government. Knowing the document needed to be fixed a constitutional convention was called. The document created at this convention has been our constitution ever since. But even the Constitution was meet with criticism. One major concern when writing the constitution was how to protect the citizens rights. The Constitution did this through the preamble, the legislative process, the limit of presidential terms, the judicial branch, and the bill of rights.
Government exists to serve the people, and not the politicians, American citizens know this. Polls show that Americans want term limitation by margins as high as three-to-one, even four-to-one. Congressional term limitation is the most important issue of our time because the future direction of our country depends upon it. There is no other way to restore government to, us, the people. There is no substitute for term limits. There are many second steps, depending upon where you sit, but there is only one first step toward turning the country around. It is con...
Through the years many changes have taken place, and technologies have been discovered, yet our Constitution remains. Some say that the Constitution was written for people hundreds of years ago, and in turn is out of step with the times. Yet its principals and guidelines have held thus far. The framers would be pleases that their great planning and thought have been implemented up until this point. However this does not compensate for the fact, that the we the people have empowered the government more so than our fore fathers had intended. Citizens were entrusted with the duty to oversee the government, yet so many times they are disinterested and only seem to have an opinion when the government’s implications affect them. As time has changed so has the American people, we often interpret our freedoms in a self serving manner, disregarding the good of the whole and also the good for the future. Thus there are no true flaws in the Constitution, it appears that the conflict emerges in the individual and their self, and poses question when we must decide when to compromise the morals that our Constitution was founded on, or when to stick to what we know is right and honest.
Term limits could increase the quality of the Supreme Court nominees. One of the driving factors behind a Supreme Court nominee is their age (Ringhand np). Individuals over 60 years of age are less likely to be appointed. This means presidents intentionally exclude a large number of highly qualified individuals from serving on our nation’s highest court (Ringhand np). Term limits resolve this problem. Furthermore, the threat of a justice’s cognitive decline may be reduced, since there would no longer be a temptation to hold out for a strategically timed retirement.
When the United States was founded, the theme behind the new government was to establish an efficient system without doling out too much power to any one person. The Founders intended to prevent a rebirth of tyranny, which they had just escaped by breaking away from England. However, when members of Congress such as Tom Foley, who served as a Representative from 1964 through 1995, and Jack Brooks, who served as a Representative from 1952 through 1994, remain in the legislative system for over forty years, it is evident that tyranny has not necessarily been eradicated from the United States (Vance, 1994, p. 429). Term limits are a necessity to uphold the Founders’ intentions, to prevent unfair advantages given to incumbents, and to allow a multitude of additional benefits.
Change is difficult and requires strong support from the voters to start the process. Currently, the two houses of the United States Congress are not restricted as to the number of terms they may serve. Under our Constitution, members of the Senate may serve an unlimited number of six-year terms and members of the House of Representatives may serve an unrestricted number of two-year terms. Their job consists of protecting the interests of their constituents (the voters back home). They organize committees to study issues of public policy, recommend action, and pass laws. Both houses of Congress must approve a bill for it to become a law. To begin the process of restricting the years of Congressional terms, it would require recommending a bill for an amendment separately and the proposal being debated in the two houses of Congress. If the bills were passed by two-thirds of the legislators in each House of Congress, then the bills would be combined into a Joint Resolution which would be sent to each of the fifty States. The Joint Resolution would be placed upon each Sta...
In 1787, The United States of America formally replaced the Articles of Confederation with a wholly new governing document, written by the delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. This document, known as the Constitution, has served as the supreme law of our land for the past 228 years. It has stood the test of time and a majority of Americans still support it today (Dougherty). The Constitution was designed in a way that allows for it to be amended, in order to address changing societal needs. Article V discusses the process by which the Constitution can be altered. This feature has enabled it to stay in effect and keep up with current times. The Constitution should not be rewritten every 19 years because it would not only weaken its importance, but it would also hurt foreign relations and continuously rewriting it would give political parties too much power.
The Constitution which was written 229 years ago, comes with many strengths and weaknesses. One such strength is that the Constitution is a living document. A living document is a document that has the ability to be updated and or drafted upon. The original document had twelve amendments. These amendments were sent to the states for ratification in 1789 and out of the twelve, ten of them were passed by the vote of eleven states in the union. Since that time of the first change in our constitution, it has been added to twenty-seven times. The Constitution is America’s founding document that has lasted for 229 years; it has changed as the country has changed. (THE CHARTERS OF FREEDOM A NEW WORLD AT HAND) The Constitution being a living document was intended to be adapted by future generations and because of its adaptability, it could have new amendments ratified and add to
Between 1787 and 1791 the Framers of the US Constitution established a system of government upon principles that had been discussed and partially implemented in many countries over the course of several centuries, but never before in such a pure and complete design, which we call a constitutional republic. Since then, the design has often been imitated, but important principles have often been ignored in those imitations, with the result that their governments fall short of being true republics or truly constitutional. The Framers of the Constitution tried very hard to design a system that would not allow any one person or group within the government to gain too much power. Personally, I think they succeeded. In order to guard against what one of the Founding Fathers called an "excess of democracy," the Constitution was built with many ways to limit the government's power. Among these methods were separating the three branches, splitting the legislature so laws are carefully considered, and requiring members of Congress to meet certain criteria to qualify for office. The Founders did leave a few problems along with their system.
“The Constitution leaves in its wake a long legacy, forever shaping the fate of many other countries. Whether those countries are currently in a state favorable to liberty or not, it is undeniable that the U.S. Constitution’s principles have caused people to rethink how to organize their political systems” (Hang). Time has only added value to the Constitution, for every time we reference it in our lives it is a testament of our trust and loyalty in what it states about our rights as individuals and the role the government plays in our lives. When it was written, the Constitution was the law of the land that gave people rights they had previously lived without. Similarly, we live lives of choice and independence because of the same document while other countries limit all the rights we are guaranteed in the Constitution. Simply put, “The Constitution is important because it protects individual freedom, and its fundamental principles govern the United States. The Constitution places the government 's power in the hands of the citizens. It limits the power of the government and establishes a system of checks and balances”
Becoming a president isn't as easy as we may think.It takes a lot of time and is a big process and involves many people to decide on If he or she will be right for the job.
Do you think that The Supreme Court should have term limits like the other branches in government? One reason why there should be term limits is that if a Justice came in then there will be modern way of thinking to handle the issues. Also, most Americans would support having a term limit on the nine U.S. Supreme Court justices, who now serve for life. Plus, after a while the justices tend to become feeble. I know that that by having term limits many people will be disappointed, but does majority matter more than a few people? That is why The Supreme Court should have term limits.
Many political commentators and pundits have described 2016 US Presidential elections as bizarre and unique (Rothenberg 2016). But when factors pertaining to the current election are observed and compared to that of the past elections, the 2016 election does not appear different from past elections. While the candidate with less popular vote winning the majority of the electoral votes makes this election little unusual, common factors like partisanship, the power held by the swing states, dynamics and tactics of the candidates’ election campaigns and the anger towards the establishment still played the most powerful role in determining the fate of the election.