By Myron MathisColumnist
With the 2012 presidential election fast approaching, everyone in the political arena is talking about “Obama this” or “Romney that,” or even an occasional “Ryan said so-and-so.” Recently, the go-to political buzz words were DNC and RNC referring to the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention.
The candidate for each party has been known for some time now so the conventions proved to be more of a spectacle than anything else. Clint Eastwood’s speech to a chair highlighted the Republican’s convention. The Democratic convention was highlighted by Bill Clinton’s moving manifesto, whose bipartisan prose and “we’re in this together” motto stirred both the audience present and those watching from home nationwide. Some believe Clinton looked and sounded more presidential than ever and if it were possible should be given a bid to run for president again.
However, the 22nd amendment of the United States Constitution stipulates in so many words that one cannot serve more than two terms as President. This legislation was prompted by Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s election to the oval office an unprecedented four times in a row. But what if we repeal the 22nd amendment? It wouldn’t be the first time in America’s history that legislators have reneged on their preceding legislative acts. The 18th amendment began an era in American history known as Prohibition where the purchase and consumption of alcoholic beverages was unconstitutional (what a nightmare for college students). But America later came to its senses, realizing it’s next to impossible to rid the nation of a long-established vice and so the 21st amendment made it once again legal to buy and drink alcohol.
Let’s look at the implications of Bill becoming President once again: Although he did not get rid of the national debt (that task will take decades) Bill Clinton was one of few Presidents in the modern era that managed our budget so well that we had an annual surplus, not deficit, for a number of years during his presidency.
Clinton has championed bipartisan politics for the majority of his political career and that’s exactly what America needs right now. We do not need one party blocking the other’s legislative agenda at the cost of the people’s welfare or one party attempting not to work with the other side of the aisle because the other side is hesitant about working with them. What we need is an agenda that supports the middle of the political spectrum and a president who knows how to work with the other party. Bill Clinton worked with both George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush on various pieces of legislation.
Why is the middle of the political spectrum so important? It is quintessential to the plights of our next president. It is said that approximately 30 percent of Americans support the Republicans’ right agenda and 30 percent support the Democrats’ left agenda, but what of the rest? Roughly 40 percent of the American public identify themselves as Independent and are straight down the middle, which I believe is a pure byproduct of the strictly partisan politics and ineffectiveness of Capitol Hill.