University of Virginia Library

Four, No More

In light of your recent
editorial, I feel compelled to
write and offer objections to
the concept of a single six-year
presidency. In my opinion six
years is much too long for one
person to occupy an office
with that much power without
being responsible to an
electorate. There would exist a
grave danger of unchecked
irresponsibility in such a term.

For example, six years is
almost as long as America's
more active involvement in the
Vietnamese civil war. If
ex-president Johnson had been
elected for six years, we would
have had to wait until 1970 to
censure his policies. Likewise,
If President Nixon had been
elected for a six year term, we
might still be waiting for
decisive action on the
economy.

On the other hand, the
desire to be re-elected does
have its benefits. Although we
are subjected to dull
Presidential public relations, an
up-coming election does force
the President, and other
presidential contenders, to take
into account public opinion
and desires. A President serving
a single term might be tempted
to go his or her own way since
he or she could not be held to
account, officially anyway.
Further, I doubt if such a term
would diminish a President's
political influence. She or he
would be interested in securing
the nomination and office for
the chosen successor.

We cannot allow the
executive branch to go
unchecked for six years. Such a
term represents a potential
danger to our civil liberties and
national interests and thus
must be resisted.