Resolved: The XXII Amendment of the U.S. Constitution should be repealed.

Resolved: The XXII Amendment of the U.S. Constitution should be repealed. Thank you Hayd for accepting this debate, I am excited at the opportunity to debate you. Good luck! Pro’s Case This Democratic Republic was established “of the people, by the people, for the people.”(1)At the time this government was established, it was a radical change from the governments that preceded it. We the people of the U.S. are to have a voice. We are to be able to elect our own representatives. Our Congress and our president are subject to our approval given via voting. Contrary to the tyrannical governments of history, the United States, “we the people,” are intended to have the sovereignty and power to govern ourselves. As indicated above, one fundamental way that we exercise our sovereignty is through voting. The only way a President is ever re-elected is if he is able to win and maintain the peoples support. This shows definitively that if a President is able to consistently gain the support of the people, resulting in his re-election, then the people through their sovereignty have determined the President should stay in this office. Clearly this would be a demonstration of the desires of the people. Imagine yourself a hiring manager and you are looking for an employee. In front of you a stack of resumes’. Are you going to look through and remove from consideration any and all candidates that have experience? Of course not!? If anything, experience is a positive impact on who may be chosen. Before even allowing the American people to exercise their sovereignty and consider who the best person for the office might be, the XXII Amendment of the United States Constitution does just that. It removes from consideration those with the most experience. This is not only foolish, but harmful. It seems self-evident that experience is valuable to the office of the president. James Madison in Federalist paper 53 said "[A] few of the members of Congress will possess superior talents; will by frequent re-elections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages. The greater the proportion of new members of Congress, and the less the information of the bulk of the members, the more apt they be to fall into the snares that may be laid before them,"(3) though he was speaking of congress, the same rings true for Presidents. In an office as important as the presidents, experience is more important than fresh perspectives, if only to be able to work effectively. This amendment sets term limits for the office of the president. Setting a term limit mitigates the natural function of elections. The people should have the power to determine if a politician has served enough terms as President. If the people feel this is the case, they could simply vote that politician out of office. Thus the impact of this amendment is to limit the sovereignty and choice of the people. This is in direct conflict with our founding principles. I contend that the people should retain the sovereignty to decide when a politician is not suitable for the office of the President. This should be done through voting. To undermine this freedom and sovereignty of the people is to allow tyranny. After all, "The people are the best judges who ought to represent them. To dictate and control them, to tell them whom they shall not elect, is to abridge their natural rights.” 2 Elliot's Debates 292-293. (3) The repeal of the XXII amendment would keep experienced candidates in consideration, allow our Democratic Republic to function as intended via elections, and most importantly, allow Americans to retain freedom and sovereignty by electing whomever they desire. Conclusion I have demonstrated that it is right for the people of the United States to be sovereign. Any other option is tyranny. The XXII Amendment threatens that sovereignty. To add insult to injury, this amendment keeps experience out of office. We clearly see that if this amendment is repealed all issues listed are resolved. If my opponent is unable to refute the significant harm this amendment poses, I will win this debate. The XXII Amendment is in conflict with core principles and harms our society. Therefore, the XXII Amendment should be repealed. Sources (1) http://www.britannica.com... (2) http://usgovinfo.about.com... (3) https://www.law.cornell.edu....html