Democracy in the United States

Does democracy strengthen itself by periodically renewing the occupant of the Presidency, or should it allow voters to keep an already consolidated leadership in power for longer?

In this new episode of the "Democracies Around the World" series, High-TechSociety presents how the United States addressed this dilemma by constitutionally limiting the number of presidential terms.

In a democracy, different institutional solutions can protect equally legitimate values. The continuity of an experienced leader at the head of the Executive Branch can contribute to the stability of the government. On the other hand, the periodic renewal of the occupant of the Presidency can reduce the risk of political concentration and strengthen democracy.

At first glance, preventing a re-election bid by a president already established in office might seem like a restriction on the voter's freedom of choice. After all, why prevent the population from keeping in office a leader they approve of?

On the other hand, allowing unlimited re-elections also raises a relevant question for democracy. The prolonged stay of the same leader in the Presidency can progressively expand their institutional influence, alter the balance of power, and reduce the renewal of leadership.

The United States had to decide what should prevail: the eventual benefit of a leader approved by the population remaining in power, or the permanent protection afforded by the periodic renewal of the presidency.

A Constitution with no limit on re-elections.

The United States Constitution , adopted in 1787 , established a four-year presidential term, but did not limit the number of re-elections.

The possibility of reelection allowed for the preservation of the experience of a president considered competent and, at the same time, his permanence in the Presidency for an indefinite period.

For approximately 150 years , this dilemma was not resolved by a constitutional rule, but by a political tradition.

The tradition started by George Washington

In 1797 , George Washington voluntarily left the Presidency after completing his second term, although there was no legal impediment to running for the office again.

His decision established a precedent of great institutional importance. From that gesture onward, it became expected that, after two terms, the president would voluntarily leave office, allowing for the renewal of leadership in the Executive Branch. The presidents who succeeded George Washington followed this practice, transforming the two-term limit into a respected custom for about a century and a half.

However, it was merely a political tradition.

Nothing prevented a popular president from running for a third or subsequent terms, leaving the decision about his remaining in the Presidency to the electorate.

The fact that led to the change

This possibility of successive re-elections, until then only potential, became a reality with Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Elected in 1932 and re-elected in 1936 , Roosevelt ran for president again in 1940 , winning a third term. In 1944 he was elected for a fourth time, becoming the only president in American history to surpass the traditional two-term limit.

His continued tenure occurred under exceptional circumstances. The United States was facing the effects of the Great Depression and, subsequently, was involved in World War II . For many voters, the continuity of presidential leadership represented stability during a period of great uncertainty.

The experience, however, produced a broader institutional reflection.

If a tradition respected for approximately 150 years could be overridden under extraordinary circumstances, should democracy continue to depend solely on that custom?

Shortly after Roosevelt's death in 1945 , Congress began the process of constitutional reform. In 1947, it approved the proposed 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution , which was ratified by the states in 1951 .

From tradition to the Constitution

The 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution established that no person may be elected President more than twice. Thus, the limit applies both to successive re-elections and to the possibility of returning to office after an interval.

The rule also governs the circumstances of presidential succession. The Vice-President or any other person in the line of succession who assumes the Presidency and serves more than two years of the remaining term may be elected only once. Conversely, if they serve less than two years of that term, they may run for president twice. Thus, in exceptional succession situations , the same person may remain in the Presidency for a maximum period of approximately ten years , although they can never be elected three times.

The change produced an important institutional effect.

Until then, the periodic renewal of the occupant of the Presidency depended on the president's voluntary decision to follow the precedent set by George Washington.

Beginning with the 22nd Amendment, it became a constitutional obligation applicable to any person, regardless of their popularity, political influence, or approval among the electorate.

What does the limitation seek to protect?

Term limits were not created to assess whether a particular president governed well or poorly. Their logic is preventative .

Even a widely approved leader needs to leave office after a certain period. Democracy should not depend on one person remaining in power for an extended period, nor should it assume that only that person is capable of leading the country.

The limitation of terms also reinforces a central idea of constitutional democracies: the Presidency is a state institution, exercised temporarily on behalf of the community, and not a personal asset of the officeholder. The periodic renewal of the President's occupant contributes to preserving this distinction.

By transforming a political custom into a constitutional rule, the United States sought to ensure that the periodic renewal of the occupant of the Presidency would no longer depend on the personal will of the rulers, but would become a permanent part of the institutional structure of democracy.

The dilemma between continuity and democratic renewal.

The American solution does not eliminate the dilemma. By preventing a third election, the Constitution also removes from the voter the possibility of keeping in office a president considered competent. In times of crisis, the country may lose an experienced leader precisely when part of the population would wish to preserve the continuity of the government.

For this reason, term limits do not represent a choice between a perfectly correct solution and a necessarily wrong one.

It represents the definition of which democratic risk deserves greater protection .

The United States concluded that the occasional benefits of a leader with broad public approval did not outweigh the institutional protection offered by periodically renewing the occupant of the Presidency.

High-Tech Society - Analysis

The American experience demonstrates that established democracies seek to reduce their dependence on the individual qualities of their leaders.

For approximately 150 years, the tradition inaugurated by George Washington proved sufficient to preserve the periodic renewal of the occupant of the Presidency. The election of Franklin D. Roosevelt to four terms, however, revealed that exceptional circumstances could override this custom.

The United States decided to respond institutionally to this challenge.

Instead of relying solely on the self-restraint of future presidents, they transformed periodic renewal into a constitutional guarantee.

This decision is not based on the assumption that every ruler will seek to unduly prolong their stay in power. It is based on a broader principle: democratic institutions should not depend on the personal virtue of rulers to preserve the periodic renewal of the occupant of the Presidency.

By constitutionally limiting presidential terms, the United States made a clear institutional choice. Between the eventual benefit of the continuity of a leader widely approved by the population and the permanent protection afforded by the periodic renewal of the occupant of the Presidency, they assigned greater value to this renewal as a permanent mechanism for protecting democracy.

By Luiz Cincurá

Founder and Editor

High-TechSociety.com

Editorial transparency: This article was produced with the support of ChatGPT during the research and preliminary content organization stages. The definition of the editorial approach, critical analysis, technical review, and final writing were carried out by the Editor, who is ultimately responsible for the published content.

Sources:

CONSTITUTION ANNOTATED. Twenty-Second Amendment – Historical Background. Library of Congress.

CONSTITUTION ANNOTATED. Twenty-Second Amendment.

NATIONAL ARCHIVES

UNITED STATES CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER. Joint Resolution Proposing the Twenty-Second Amendment.

THE AVALON PROJECT – Yale Law School. The Federalist No. 72 (Alexander Hamilton).

TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY. House Debate on the Twenty-Second Amendment.

HISTORY.COM Why Does the US Have Presidential Term Limits?

PBS NEWSHOUR. Why does the US have presidential term limits?