March 21, 1947

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Speaker to lay before the House for immediate consideration House Joint Resolution 27, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the terms of office of the President, with Senate amendments.

The Clerk will report the title of the joint resolution and the Senate amendments. ·

The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.

The Clerk read the Senate amendments, as follows:

Page 1, line 9, strike out all after "SECTION 1." over to and including "term." in line oi, page 2, and insert "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than 2 years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed , by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, duri n g the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such. term."

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, this bill with the Senate amendment was returned to the House on March 13. It was taken informally before the full Committee on the J'Udiciary, and I am instructed by that committee to call the resolution up at this time for the purpose of agreeing to the Senate amendment. I have followed precedent and cleared through the majority leader and the minority leader.

I therefore move that the House concur in the Senate amendment.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. MICHENER moves that the House concur in the Senate amendment.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 1 hour.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield me 5 minutes after he has completed his statement?

Mr. MICHENER. Yes; if the gentleman desires to be heard.

Mr. McCORMACK. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, this matter was thoroughly discussed in the House when House Joint Resolution 27 was before us for consideration. Adequate study was given by the Senate committee to the House bill and, with amendments, it was reported to the floor of the Senate where extensive debate was indulged in. After that debate the Senate amendment, now contained in the bill, was adopted.

What the Senate amendment does is best explained by reading the amendment:

No person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice .

That is clear, two terms of 4 years each.

And no person who has held the office of President or acted as President for more than 2 years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.

That is the material change. There is a change in language and a change in context. Under the Senate amendment it is possible for a President to serve . two full terms, to be elected twice, regardless of any other servi.ce which he might have had .as President, provided he shall only be elected once if he has served . more than 2 years of another or a third term. The possibility therefore i.s that a President may conceivably, under this amendment, serve not to exceed 10 years.

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MICHENER. I yield.

Mr. RANKIN. That would not apply to the present President, Mr. Truman, if he were reelected , would it?

Mr. MICHENER. No; I can answer that it does not apply to the present occupant of the White House, who is serving as President by virtue of having been elected as Vice President and the death of the President. It would in no way affect the present occupant of the office.

Mr. RANKIN. In · other words, if President Truman were reelected in 1948 and again in 1952, he could serve out those terms.

· Mr. MICHENER. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. WALTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MICHENER. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. WALTER. What the gentleman has stated is correct, but not insofar as the language he has just read is concerned. The following language is designed to meet the situation described by the gentleman from Mississippi.

Mr. MICHENER. As to the present incumbent of the office, yes.

Mr. WALTER. As to the present incumbent of the office.

Mr. MICHENER. The gentleman is quite correct. I intended to read all the language in the amendment. I may say that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALTER] is a very able member of the Judiciary Committee and, together with the committee, gave very close attention to this amendment since it was promulgated by the Senate. Personally, · I prefer-and I think most if not all members of the House Judiciary Committee prefer-the language adopted by the House. To me that language is more concise and understandable. · There are no useless words. It is not pregnant with questions .

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield further?

Mr. MICHENER. I yield.

Mr. RANKIN. As one Member who voted for the resolution when it passed the House, I wish to say to the gentleman from Michigan that I prefer the language of the Senate amendment.

Mr. WALTER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MICHENER. I yield.

Mr. WALTER. Was not this language inserted in the Senate bill in order to avoid the possibility of anyone's pointing their finger at the present occupant of the White House?

Mr. MICHENER. That was the purpose, and it was stated in debate in the Senate that this was not an action in personam.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MICHENER. / [ yield to th'e gen- tleman from Georgia.

Mr. CAMP. !. think I misunderstood the gentleman's statement a moment ago. Is it not posslble-not speaking of the present occupant of the office-for some President to serve 10 years?

Mr. MICHENER. Yes; I thought I so stated. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. CAMP. I think the gentleman said eight. I just wanted it corrected.

Mr. MICHENER. If I did, I was wrong; two whole terms and not to exceed two additional years or 10 years.

Mr. CAMP. That is right. .

Mr. MICHENER. It would be conceivable that a President might serve 10 years. That could happen. I believe when we legislate, we should always think of the possibilities and not the probabilities. The probabilities are that this amendment of the Senate would provide two terms · of 4 years each for any one man, with the possibility just alluded to. The important thing is a definite limitation of terms. ·

Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MICHENER. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. I am sorry, I did not hear all of the gentleman's discussion and he may have answered this. As I understand, under the proposed amendment, as far as the present incumbent of the Presidency is concerned, he will be entitled to be a candidate to the Presidency two full terms.

Mr. MICHENER. Yes.

Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. It would not apply in the future to any · other · Vice President who succeeds to the presidency.

Mr. MICHENER. In the future, my understanding is that but · two terms of 4 years each are contemplated. This language in the Senate amendment is rather complicated but it is the considered conclusion of the Senate.

. Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. Let us · See about that nov1. The gentleman says 10 years. Suppose a President and Vice President are elected for 4 years, and the President should die within 1 year. , If that Vice President would come in and serve 3 . years as President, then would he be entitled to two terms after that?

Mr. MICHENER. No.

Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. Then why is a special exception made to this · one incumbent, and if so, how then in the future could anybody be elected for more than two terms? '

Mr. MICHENER. The first part of the amendment says:

No person shall be elected to the office of President more than twice-

No person who has held the office of President or acted as President for more than 2 years of the term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. That is very clear then. What that means is this: If a man ascends to the Presidency from the Vice Presidency, and if he served more than 2 years, then he cannot qual- ify to be a candidate twice for the Presi- dency.

Mr. MICHENER. No; he cannot q al~ ify twice.

Mr . . JENKINS of Ohio. Well, let us take my case. Suppose a man is elected President and another is elected Vice President, and the President dies within a month, and the Vice President succeeds him. Now, that Vice President cannot be elected but once, because he served more than 2 years in that term.

Mr. MICHENER. that is the way it is intended to pe.

Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. Here is what the amendment means then. Any man who succeeds to the office after the President has served 2 years, in other words, succeeds so that he will serve less than 2 years, can · be a candidate twice, but if he ascends to the Presidency within ~ years after he has been made Vice President he cannot be a candidate for the Presidency but once.

Mr. MICHENER. I said in the beginning that I considered this language more complicated than the House language. If the gentleman will read the debates on this matter in the Senate he will see that there was a difference of opmwn. The gentleman's interpretation is correct. · Of course, this limitation of one term would apply to any other person, like the Secretary of State, who executed the office of President more than 2 years after the beginning of anyone else's 4-year term. ·

If the Senate amendment to House Joint Resolution 27 is concurred in at this time, that ends the consideration of the resolution by the Congress. Two- thirds of the House and the Senate having voted in favor of the resolution, it then goes to the legislatures of the several States for ratification or rejection. Usually legislation passing the House and the Senate contains some elements of compromise. That is natural because the 531 Members of the Congress do not always think exactly alike, especially when details are involved. So it is in the case before us : More than two-thirds of each House is agreed that the people should be permitted to vote on limiting the term which a President of the United States may serve: There is difference among those two-thirds as to the length of that term. There is difference as to the best language to be used in a consti- tutional amendment. Those differences have not been composed in precise ac- cordance with the views of any individual in the Congress. There is some language I would like to change. I could select a term of limitation more agreeable to me than that contained in the resolution. However, this is the composite view of the people's representatives in Congress, and I hope that my motion will prevail, that this Senate amendment will be agreed to, and that the State legislatures will be advised at once and permitted to pass on this important question in their respective current sessions.

Here today, we are only giving the peo- ple back home the right to say what they want. Three-fourths of the States must join two-thirds · of the Congress in ' an affirmative vote before the Constitution can be admended. I believe the States will act speedily.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCoRMAcK). - ·

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker. the present legislative situation . or legislative status of this proposed amendment to the Constitution is such that naturally there is no opposition, as far as I know, certainly not on my part, to the motion made by the gentleman from That is correct, and . Michigan [Mr. MICHENER].

However, I want the RECORD to show that because there is no opposition at this legislative stage that does not mean that Members, like myself, vigorously oppose the passage of this legislation to amend the Constitution; and we hope that when it goes to the several legislatures · that they will give profound consideration, as I am sure they will, to the serious implications involved if this amendment becomes a part of the organic law of our country.

During the debate when this resolution . was before the House I said that putting this into the Constitution will tie the hands of future generations of Americans; that what we are doing today is not legislating for ourselves from a constitutional angle, but acting in ' a - manner that will be binding upon future generations of Americans after we are dead and gone. Some time · in the future, if our country is engaged in a war and our back is to the wall, and a future generation has a President whose second term is drawing to an end, this very amendment could produce a condi- tion that might place future generations of Americans in a strait-jacket and seriously imperil the continued existence of our country.

I recognize that men have honest views both ways on this matter. I respect the views of those who are advocates of a two-term · restriction, but I am very deeply concerned about the operation of this amendment if it becomes a part of the Constitution. The chances are that ~ will riot be here and nobody in this body will be here when that occasion arises in the future, if it should. We will all have taken the journey by that time, in all probability. I hope no future generation of Americans will be faced with the problem, but we cannot eliminate the possibility that war will visit our country again in the future after we are dead and gone; and if it does, and if there ' is a good President in office leading our people at that time, and his second term is drawing to a close, this very amendment will have a serious and adverse effect upon the people of America and upon the very institutions of government in which we believe.

I emphasize this for whatever value it may have to the members of the several legislatures when this amendment comes before them on the question of ratifica- · tion. This is a question they cannot escape, It is a question no thinking legislator in this Congress can just brush aside by saying we are referring it to the legislatures. When it gets to the members of the legislatures, they have their responsibility to pass upon the question. I passed upon it when the matter was in the House before and I am passing upon it now. I am very much disturbed about the inflexibility of this amendment in binding Americans of tomorrow and preventing them from exercising a flexible judgment in meeting an emergency or an acute situation that may confront them after you and I are dead and gone.

Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MCCORMACK. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. THOMASON. We hear a lot of talk these days about World War III, which we all hope and pray will never happen. Is it not a fact that if that sad day should ever come and some great man is President of this country, regardless of his political faith, and we are right in the middle of a terrible war where probably the result is in doubt, and three-fourths of the American States have adopted this amendment; we would be thrown into the throes of a great political contest and under no conditions could that man be reelected? That is the truth, is it not? I contend you can always trust the people and I am against this conference report.

Mr. McCORMACK. Undoubtedly . . It is because of my disturbed state of mind, not in opposition to the action taken now, although I do not favor it, that I wanted the record to show that there was a voice raised at this stage of the legislative proceedings pointing out the danger that lies in the ultimate ratification of this amendment by three-fourths of the legislatures of the Union.

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I am sure the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. MCCORMACK] is very sincere and conscientious, as he always is, and he has made his usual good argument. He made this same argument when this resolution was considered by the House before it was voted on. The House passed this resolution by a vote of 285 for, and only 121 against. That resolution limited a President to not more than 8 years, or two terms, under any circumstances. There was a possibility that a Vice President might serve only one term of 4 years and a minor fraction of a second term.

The gentleman is quite right that all this resolution does is submit this question to the people, to the States, for their determination. The . passage of this resolution is not binding until three-fourths of the States have affirmatively said that that is what they want. I have always felt that the people can be trusted when they are advised. The people back home know whether they want to limit the term of a President. They can and will vote intelligently, because the proposal has been debated for years.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MICHENER. I yield.

Mr. McCORMACK. I would like to make the observation at this · time that the debate on this amendment in both bodies was of a very high character, and confining myself to commenting on the action in the House, the debate by Members on both sides of the aisle was on such a very high level I believe all of us can feel proud of it. ·

Mr. MIC,HENER. Yes; the manner of approach has b . been in the right spirit. l was especially impressed with what the gentleman said when he took the floor a moment ago and expressed his views, but made it clear to the House that the majority of the House and the other · body having acted, he was not in opposition to the action contemplated by my motion.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 · minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. RAN­

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I am taking this time because I do not want the impression to go out that Members on our side of the House do not want the legislatures of the various .States to ratify this amendment.

Remember, this amendment .would not prevent President Truman from succeeding himself in 1948 and 1952.

The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCORMACK] talks about a contingency that may arise generations from now. My answer is that the Constitution can be amended at any time.

Talk about limitations on future generations-why, some of the greatest blessings we have ever enjoyed are found in the strict limitations placed in the Constitution by the founding fathers. Talk about a condition arising in time of war? That fias happened twice. During the War Between the States you had a Presidential election in 1864, right in the heat of the conflict.

They talk about a President passing away or leaving office in time of war. We had that happen in this war. Has it occurred to you that we changed Presidents before the war closed with either Germany or Japan?

Remember, it was Harry Truman who ordered the use of the atomic bomb that really ended the war with Japan.

Mr. Speaker, there is only one change I would like to see made. I am sorry the Senate did not provide that a man who had succeeded to the Presidency from the Vice Presidency would be eligible to two successive terms. But they did not see fit to do that, and we must vote for or against this amendment. However, they did so provide as to the present occupant of the White House.

In my opinion, the overwhelming majority of the legislatures of the various States will approve this amendment.

I call attention again to the fact that in 1861, when we knew . we were going into a war and when our President of the Confederacy had already been selected, the Constitutional Convention of tion. the Confederate States--which was composed of the best minds in the whole country-put a limitation of 6 years in their Constitution. No President, no matter how long the war might have lasted, could have served more than 6 years. Mr. Davis himself agreed to that limitation.

A great many Members wanted to put that limitation in this amendment. I thought it was best to limit it to two 4-year terms. But I do think the Senate acted wisely in providing that this limitation shall not prevent the present incumbent from succeeding himself in 1948 and in 1952; and also providing that any future President who has not served more than 2 years of a term . to which he has succeeded may be a candidate for reelection at the two succeeding elections. I am sorry they did not leave it, as I said, so that a man who has succeeded to the Presidency would be eligible to two successive terms.

But, taking it all in all, I think this amendment should be adopted, and I believe it will be approved by an overwhelming majority of the legislatures of the various States.

As for this matter of putting the people of the future in a strait-jacket, it does not do that; because, as I said, they have a right to change the Constitution at any time.

Mr. FOLGER. Mr. Speaker, I was and am opposed to the bill to amend the Constitution so as to limit terms of President to two terms. I think the amendment made by th,e other body improves the original bill somewhat; this does not, however, change my attitude in opposition to the measure.

This subject was fully discussed by the framers of our Constitution, and in their combined judgment it was deemed unwise to limit the terms of a President to two. Situations and conditions can arise that would make it undesirable and contrary to the wishes of our people that such a limitation become a part of the organic law of the Nation. Recent occurrences confirm, in my mind, the danger of such a limitation. ' After all, it is a matter for the people and should remain so. One, to be elected one time or two times or three, must receive the nomination, and he must receive a majority of the votes of the people. To impress this two-term limitation or Prohibition would deny the right or privilege of the people to have established their wishes and judgment that might be exercised in a case of emergency.

There is not even a fanciful danger that a third or fourth term will occur except under extreme circumstances. By the passage of this bill or resolution we do not escape our responsibility by saying that " the matter is left to the States for their determination. The very passage of the bill or resolution is more than the granting of a privilege that the States vote on the question, but it is essentially an invitation to the States to do so. It would not be imagined that the Congress would adopt a resolution of this character unless it were the desire of Congress that it be accepted. What we do is to substantially place our approval upon this constitutional inhibiWe, no doubt, will not again find it necessary to elect one to a third term or a fourth. What we propose to do is to deny to our posterity the privilege to protect themselves, if. they will, from an apparent or certain hazard, which would occur through the removal of one the people desire to be President at a time that, in their opinion, might well result in a great danger to the Nation.

I just desire that any, in posterity, who may have occasion to wonder what my position is on this important subject may find it in the RECORD: That I am opposed to this legislation.

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Speaker, House Joint Resolution 27, which relates to the Presidential tenure in office, came before Subcommittee No. 4 of the Judiciary Committee, of which I am the chairman, and we gave this matter very careful consideration, which resulted in the reporting of the resolution which was then considered by the full Judiciary Committee, reported favorably, and which was then presented to the House and passed by the House by a rather large majority over the required two-thirds vote. This measure then went to the other body, and certain amendments have been adopted written into this resolution. While I far prefer the measure which was adopted by the House, and I prefer the language which was contained therein to that which is now contained in the amendment adopted by the other body, but in order to finally determine this subject and to fix a definite policy relating to the tenure of the office of our President, I am willing to yield to the amendments. This policy, if finally adopted, will be very helpful to both the people and any person aspiring to become President of this great Nation, I am confident. -

Mr. Speaker, all of th _ e Members are aware that the import of the pending resolution is that it merely seeks the authority to submit this question to the various State legislatures, and if threefourths of the States, by and through their State legislatures, approve this policy of fixing the tenure of the office of our Chief Executive, then this joint resolution will become effective. Otherwise, it will have no force and effect. All will note that the additional amendment is incorporated in this resolution, by amendment adopted in the other body, that the provisions of the pending joint resolution does not ' apply to the present incumbent of the office of President.

The mere authority being granted in this joint resolution for the people, by and through their State legislatures, to pass upon the provisions contained therein is certainly a sound and constructive policy. I, as one Member, desire that the people have the full right and power, through their State legislatures, to determine this policy. All those who oppose this joint resolution ; when the final vote is taken, will be in effect saying that they do not desire that the people, through the recognized processes of submitting this important subject to their State legislatures, have any voice in determining this question. What we need in this country is a little closer contact with the people, and to permit the people to participate in the functions of government, and the policies of government. This is one instance wherein the people shoUld have the opportunity of expressing their views upon the policy of fixing the tenure of the office of President. Many of our Presidents have expressed their views upon this subject. Their expressed opinions should be carefUlly considered. The debates in the Constitutional Convention, upon this very question, lend much support to the fair and reasonable limitation fixed by · the pending joint resolution.

Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that the House will accept the amendments adopted in the Senate, thereby finally concluding this measure insofar as this table. legislative body is concerned. It is also my fervent hope that every State legislature will give this joint resolution very careful consideration, and, after consulting with the people generally, take such action thereon as is just and proper. The reasons mentioned today of fear for our future if this joint resolution is passed are, I am constrained to believe, groundless. In the last war, before it ended, we changed Presidents. In the Civil War, a kindred situation developed. It is unthinkable for us to believe that there are no craftsmen who are able to take the place of any man in any office or position. The · people recognize that there are many-yes, many-who are able to assume the work of any person, in any position, at any time. . I. therefore, hope this question may be concluded today by the acceptance of the amendments, and that this question may be submitted to the State legislatures for approval or rejection, as they may determine.

Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, the splendid argument made by the gentleman from Massachusetts LMr. McCoRMACK] was most convincing and this legislation, I fear, may come to plague us if the legislatures of .two-thirds of the States should approve, which I hope they will not. It has been stated that while favorable action has been taken by Congress it does not mean that the various State legislatures would follow the action of Congress. However, I venture to say that in many of the States it will be felt that in view that Congress has acted that the legislatures should not deny favorable action on the amendment. Personally I would have preferred that instead of leaving the matter to the legislatures that we would have provided for conventions so that the real viewpoint of the people of the respective States would control.

I cannot quite understand why the majority feel the need of changing the Constitution which has stood us so well for 160 years. It is my opinion that only an extraordinary man, one of great ability, and one who had the interest of the country at heart, could be urged to run and be reelected to a third and fourth Presidential term, as was President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It is certain that a weak man who did not enjoy the confidence of the people could not be reelected to a third or fourth term. Consequently, I voted against the original bill and shall vote against the adoption of the conference report.

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question.

The previous question was ordered.

The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. THOMASON) there were-ayes 81, noes 29.

Mr. FORAND. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will count.

Mr. FORAND. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the point of order.

So (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the Senate amendments were concurred in.-

A motion to reconsider was laid on the

GENERAL L:EAVE TO EXTEND REMARKS

Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members who so desire may be permitted to extend their own remarks · in the RECORD preceding the vote on the resolution.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan?

There was no objection.