Republican Dynasty Ahead?

If there is to be any praise for beauracracy, then now might be the time to express it. Rep. Steny Hoyer introduced House Joint Resolution 24 this past February which would repeal the 22nd Amendment. You know, the two-term limit deal. It says:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section. 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

Much to my chagrin, it is being sponsored by a fellow Wisconsonian, Rep. James Sensenbrenner. I can understand Sensenbrenner's desire to repeal it as he's a Republican. But Hoyer is a Democrat. In fact, so are the other sponsors of the bill. These people are from blue states. Minnesota, California...Are the folks in these states crying out for the amendment's repeal? Here's part of what Steny had to say:

"The time has come to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, and not because of partisan politics. While I am not a supporter of the current President, I feel there are good public policy reasons for a repeal of this amendment. Under the Constitution as altered by the 22nd Amendment, this must be President George W. Bush’s last term even if the American people should want him to continue in office. This is an undemocratic result...We do not have to rely on rigid constitutional standards to hold our Presidents accountable. Sufficient power resides in the Congress and the Judiciary to protect our country from tyranny."

If a good Lefty were in office, I highly suspect that many on the Left would be in favor of such a resolution as this. But with the Republicans in control, the Left will loathe to cede them the opportunity to continue running this country. In principle, I agree with him. I'm not out to subvert democracy. But, considering that our past two presidential elections had "voting irregularities", to say the least, I'm not sure that now is the right time to repeal the 22nd Amendment. But if the decision to do goes forward, then we should at least take measures to ensure that the principles of democracy are upheld. It's one thing to praise them, as does Hoyer in his panegyrical press release, but it's another thing altogether to take steps to realize those principles in practice. It's all well & good to say, "Hey, I'm gonna get that rascally 22nd Amendment repealed for the sake of democracy" but I think democracy would be better served by our Representatives if they instead spent their time ensuring that the elections are fair. If they are rigged, irrregular, or in any way not fair, then this negates any gains made for democracy by repealing the 22nd Amendment.

If we feel we must get rid of it, then let's also seriously look into voting fraud. Let us also considering changing, not only presidential terms, but also the electoral process itself. Perhaps we should consider instant runoffs.

Currently, the resolution is in a committee or subcommittee and hopefully it will stay there until it dies.