The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-02-10
FREEING THE president.


Unfortunately most of the discussion of the
single term amendment to the constitution, pro-
posed and adopted by the senate has been of d
personal nature. Many. IL not the majority. of
the senators decided their votes on personal
grounds and among these were all but very few
OF those who opposed IT,
The Progresslves naturally voted against the
resolution knowing that its adoption would
eliminate Roosevelt and that without Roosevelt
they would have no party. Many Democrats
voted for 1t In order TO square their actions
with the single term plank of the party's plat
form, but few voted for 1t out of antagonism,
conscious or otherwise. toward Woodrow Wilson.
Many of the reactionaries voted for it because
perfectly conscious antagonism to Theodore
Roosevelt. More than any other one thing per-
sonalities figured in the process of reasoning on
the part OF the senator's and more than any one
person Roosevelt was in their minds.
However, even had the personal equation been
eliminated it is probable that the amendment
would have been adopted. Certainly, to our
md. it should have been adopted, although the
public demand for it has not been greatly in
reason, that it will be ratified by three.fourths
Of the States. There sufficient good reasons
for limiting a president to one term--reasons
weighty enough to Offset whatever arguments
there may be against it. Clap-trap about the
people having the right to elect man as fire.
quently as they please is claptrap and moth.
ing more No disputes that right. The peo-
pie have it now But they have other rights
one Of which is voluntarily to put curb upon
their power by constitutional restrictions. The
question is whether the people should impose
restrictions upon themselves and the argument
should be for and against the restriction under
consideration. Objections to the amendment
should be made the ground that the pro-
posed constitutional restriction as to reelection
of chief executives is unwise and not that the
people have not the right to surrender certain
of their powers II the so choose
In favor of the amendment there lis one arg1.
ment which is superior to ali others and when
over-rides all objections From the day he is
inaugurated the chief executive of the nation Is
confronted with the ambition for another term
Temptation to neglect public duties to further
that ambition arises from the first. His energy
is divided between the exercise of the duties
of his office and preparations for another term.
Appointments made to that end more than
TO the end of public efficiency. Under some
men personal ambition suffers and under some
the public welfare suffers, the lines being drawn
according to the extent OF the executives aIl-
bition and according to his character. Even
though there should be elected president abb
selutely dlsinterested, his .subordinates, having
an equal interest in his reelection, would divide
their time between work and politics AS
consequence the public business suffers. There
not be, Probably men should be perfect, but
they are not. We confronted with what
is and not with what should be.
This phase of the question was clearly stated
by President Taft when he declared before the
Lotos club of New York that no matter how
will exert their influence to secure their chiefs
reelection and that under such circumstances
"it 10 difficult to prevent the whole administra-
tion from losing part of its effectiveness for
the public good by this diversion to political
effort
A president free from temptation to act for
political effect, with no Inducements to make his
appointments TO gain support, with no need to
work in the dark and able to devote his entire
time to the public business would be possible for
the first time in the history of the country should
this amendment be adopted