- Sep 20, 2002
- 570
- 9
- 44
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
Yesterday I sent a letter to my congressman concerning a ratification of the constitution to allow the removal of the President by popular demand:
So all in all, this is kind of a way to give more power to people in how their President uses his/her power. If a majority of the American people are not in agreement with the President's policies, then his/her removal by popular demand should be allowed.
Dear Representative Cooper:
I propose a ratification of the constitution that allows the systematic removal of the President of the United States in times when the country calls for new leadership due to a national emergency or the when the President is simply "performing poorly" on the job.
In order to be used properly, Congress would first have to consider what the polls show on support of the President and why the President is so unpopular. If there is not enough support in the polls for a removal of the President, then Congress may consider a popular demand impeachment a waste of time and move on.
If there is enough support with the American people for removal of the President, Congress can a begin a round of voting on wether or not it agrees that the President needs to reconsider his/her policies with the American people. This must pass by a majority vote in both houses of Congress.
The President would then have 30 days to make amends with American people. To change his/her policies on the issues in order to try to regain support. If after 30 days the polls show significantly increased support of the President by the American people, Congress can then decide to drop the popular demand impeachment if they want to. But if there is not enough increased support then. . .
Congress would then have to take another vote on wether or not it agrees that the President is still not doing what is right for the country and may need to be removed from office. This must also pass by a majority vote in both houses of Congress.
Next, the Vice President of the United States must find a running mate and the President's opposing party must select a Presidential candidate and that candidate must find a running mate. At the same time, Congress will have to decide when to hold a deelection of the President. This should all be done in 30 days at the most.
Next, the people of the United States of America must decide by a majority vote in each state wether or not they feel that the President is doing a good job. When voting, a voter must first give a 'yes' or 'no' to the following question: Do you feel that President of the United States should be removed from office? If the voter answers 'no' then they need not answer any more questions. However, if the voter answers 'yes' then he/she must also vote for a replacement candidate. The same system that is used in ordinary elections to elect Presidents is also used in the deelection.
If the vote passes, then Congress must set a date no later than 30 days from the election date to swear in the new President and Vice President.
I don't think this would actually be needed at this time in history, but in the event that the economy crashes and/or this war with Iraq "goes to hell," then desperate times call for desperate measures. If President Bush can't seem to get the country's priorities straight, then his systematic removal from office may be necessary. Of course, this law could be used again with future Presidents if need be.
Yours,
Jason Hughes
U.S. Citizen and Resident of 5th district of Tennessee
So all in all, this is kind of a way to give more power to people in how their President uses his/her power. If a majority of the American people are not in agreement with the President's policies, then his/her removal by popular demand should be allowed.