Amendment Pros And Cons

Time is a rather peculiar thing; It can be measured, although it is not a physical object. It is a concept that runs on forever and never truly stops. Most importantly though, it provides a limit in which one can hold a governmental position. With the grasp of time, the a chairperson from the House of Representatives hold a chair for two years, and then are up for reelection. Meanwhile, a member from the Senate remains a time span of six years, before a reelection occurs. Although, both may run on a different period of time, they do have one thing in common. The number of times a chairperson may run for the position is limitless. Some may agree with this concept, meanwhile, others may have found limitless reelection to be slightly excessive.
For those who disagree with the terms, they could call for a constitutional amendment. However, getting an amendment passed can become rather tedious. To begin with, a proposition of an amendment must be presented to congress and then passed with a two-thirds majority vote. The law is then sent for publication where it can be administered amongst the state legislatures by the Archivist for their consideration. If the bill receives a three-fourths majority vote by the states, it can then be certified as an amendment. However, once the bill has reached …show more content…
Although there may be some hardships in a representative being able to learn their position and gaining a voice in Congress in a shorter time, one must pick the lesser of two evils. Therefore, preventing power through incumbency would be the better decision, because everyone would be able to have a chance to have their voices heard. Not to mention, there would be less of an intimidation in running for an election, therefore more of a variety of people would be flowing through the