Constitutional Limitations on Reëligibility of National and State Chief Executives

1952 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 438-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph E. Kallenbach
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Chief Executives ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
Current Term ◽  
Executive Officers

On March 1, 1951, the Administrator of General Services certified that the proposed presidential tenure amendment submitted to the states by Congress in 1947 had been ratified by thirty-six states, thus making it a part of the United States Constitution. Adoption of this proposal, which becomes the Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution, disposes of an issue that has agitated American politics periodically since the establishment of the Presidency. Hereafter no person will be eligible for a third term as President if he has served two full elective terms or one full elective term plus more than one-half of another term through succession to the office. President Truman, who would otherwise be rendered ineligible for reëlection following completion of his current term, is exempted from the ban by a qualifying clause which excludes from coverage “any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress.”Hostility to long continuance in office, particularly for executive officers, has been a prominent feature of American political thinking since Revolutionary times. Seven of the original state constitutions, all of which were formulated prior to adoption of the federal Constitution, carried clauses limiting reeligibility of the state chief executive.

scholarly journals Why East Asians but not South Asians are underrepresented in leadership positions in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (9) ◽  
pp. 4590-4600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackson G. Lu ◽  
Richard E. Nisbett ◽  
Michael W. Morris
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
South Asians ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
Leadership Positions ◽  
East Asians ◽  
Cultural Fit ◽  
Bamboo Ceiling ◽  
Executive Officers

Well-educated and prosperous, Asians are called the “model minority” in the United States. However, they appear disproportionately underrepresented in leadership positions, a problem known as the “bamboo ceiling.” It remains unclear why this problem exists and whether it applies to all Asians or only particular Asian subgroups. To investigate the mechanisms and scope of the problem, we compared the leadership attainment of the two largest Asian subgroups in the United States: East Asians (e.g., Chinese) and South Asians (e.g., Indians). Across nine studies (n= 11,030) using mixed methods (archival analyses of chief executive officers, field surveys in large US companies, student leader nominations and elections, and experiments), East Asians were less likely than South Asians and whites to attain leadership positions, whereas South Asians were more likely than whites to do so. To understand why the bamboo ceiling exists for East Asians but not South Asians, we examined three categories of mechanisms—prejudice (intergroup), motivation (intrapersonal), and assertiveness (interpersonal)—while controlling for demographics (e.g., birth country, English fluency, education, socioeconomic status). Analyses revealed that East Asians faced less prejudice than South Asians and were equally motivated by work and leadership as South Asians. However, East Asians were lower in assertiveness, which consistently mediated the leadership attainment gap between East Asians and South Asians. These results suggest that East Asians hit the bamboo ceiling because their low assertiveness is incongruent with American norms concerning how leaders should communicate. The bamboo ceiling is not an Asian issue, but an issue of cultural fit.

More Cash, Less Innovation: The Effect of the American Jobs Creation Act on Patent Value

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Heitor Almeida ◽  
Po-Hsuan Hsu ◽  
Dongmei Li ◽  
Kevin Tseng
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
Multinational Firms ◽  
Institutional Ownership ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
Innovation Strategy ◽  
Patent Value ◽  
Cash Inflow ◽  
Executive Officers

Firms can become less innovative following a sudden cash “inflow.” Specifically, multinational firms that were eligible to repatriate (and indeed repatriated) cash to the United States under the American Jobs Creation Act (AJCA) generate less valuable patents than otherwise similar firms. They also explore more. This effect only exists among firms in less competitive industries, firms with lower institutional ownership (IO), and firms with overconfident chief executive officers (CEOs); this effect is mainly driven by the reduction in the value of U.S.-originated patents. Our evidence suggests that, without appropriate governance, a cash windfall may lead managers to engage in riskier innovation strategy, which can destroy value.

The Pressures of Growth

1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan G. Norton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Environmental Goals ◽  
Executive Officers ◽  
The Right

Critics of environmentalism have often charged that the movement is “elitist.” By this is meant, among other complaints, that environmentalists are mainly members of the middle and upper classes who have achieved a comfortable level of economic well-being and who want to “lock up” natural resources, discourage economic growth, and withhold upwardly mobile job opportunities from less privileged economic groups in the society. Environmentalists, of course, dispute this criticism, arguing that it is unsupported by any reasonable interpretation of either environmentalists’ goals or the socioeconomic data. Nevertheless, the criticism strikes a sensitive nerve. It is interesting that the charge is directed at environmentalists, a majority of whom are liberals or progressives, both from the right, which claims environmental regulations choke off economic opportunities, and from the left, which argues that skirmishes over resource policy represent just one more episode in the ongoing war between the classes. What is undeniable is that the growth issue is the most difficult one facing environmentalists today. Here is a real dilemma. If environmentalists embrace economic growth in America, they apparently embrace endless sprawl, boom towns, high energy use, degradation of watersheds and wetlands, more chemicals—evils without end. If they oppose growth, however, they appear to favor unemployment, reduced wages, and economic stagnation. About growth, the dilemma encourages ambivalence and waffling: In 1977, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund published The Unfinished Agenda: The Citizen’s Guide to Environmental Issues, which emphasized a need for “a major transformation in human values” and argued that the United States has “enjoyed a development that is no longer possible for most [nations].” The United States must, the report urges, aid in “the transition from abundance to scarcity” and provide examples of how, “in a ‘Conserver Society,’ quality of life can be preserved (and, for many, increased) in an era of scarcity.” In the years since the Reagan antiregulatory revolution, however, environmentalists have also emphasized the importance of economic growth in achieving environmental goals. In a 1985 agenda document (environmentalists love to compose agendas), the Group of Ten (chief executive officers of ten leading environmental organizations) said: “Continued economic growth is essential.

The Second Amendment: A Missing Transatlantic Context for the Historical Meaning of “the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms”

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Thomas Konig
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right ◽  
Do So

The present essay seeks to work at the intersection of law and history, a meeting point where interpretation of the Second Amendment has been more characterized by collision than confluence. Analysis brought to bear on the historical meaning of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” has coalesced around two competing normative interpretations: either that the amendment guarantees a personal, individual right to bear arms, or that it applies only collectively to the effectiveness of the militia. It is a premise of this essay that both these models are historically unsatisfactory, the products of present-day normative agendas that have polarized the debate into two competing and largely ahistorical models—a type of historians' fallacy that David Hackett Fischer has labeled the “fallacy of false dichotomous questions.” Fischer's description aptly describes the current controversy over the historical meaning of the Second Amendment: in addition to being “grossly anachronistic,” its two opposing positions “are mutually exclusive, and collectively exhaustive, so that the there is no overlap, no opening in the middle, and nothing is omitted at either end.” It is not without challenge on just these grounds, however, as a recent call for a “new more sophisticated paradigm” attests. This essay seeks to provide that new model and to do so by grounding the “right of the people to keep and bear arms” in eighteenth-century concepts of rights, not those of the twenty-first century, and to contextualize the right to bear arms in an eighteenth-century political struggle now largely ignored but well known to constitutional polemicists framing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Parliament's rebuilding of an English militia while denying the Scots the right to do so, despite Scotland's history and its claimed constitutional rights according to its coequal status in Great Britain. That struggle nevertheless remains a missing context that prefigured American debates over constituting and guaranteeing local militias in the coequal states of the federal union established by the United States Constitution in 1787 and 1788. Once the time came for seeking a written guarantee of local militia effectiveness in the federal Constitution, the language and substance of this transatlantic legacy had great influence. As experience, they gave political urgency to the drafting and ratification of the Second Amendment; as a theory of rights, they embodied an eighteenth-century individual right exercised collectively.

Empires of Writing: Britain, America and Constitutions, 1776–1848

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Colley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Constitutional History ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
American Colonies ◽  
History Of ◽  
Democratic Revolution ◽  
History Of Western Civilization ◽  
The Revolution

Approximately 50 years ago, R. R. Palmer published his two volume masterworkThe Age of the Democratic Revolution. Designed as a “comparative constitutional history of Western civilization,” it charted the struggles after 1776 over ideas of popular sovereignty and civil and religious freedoms, and the spreading conviction that, instead of being confined to “any established, privileged, closed, or self-recruiting groups of men,” government might be rendered simple, accountable and broadly based. Understandably, Palmer placed great emphasis on the contagion of new-style constitutions. Between 1776 and 1780, eleven onetime American colonies drafted state constitutions. These went on to inform the provisions of the United States Constitution adopted in 1787, which in turn influenced the four Revolutionary French constitutions of the 1790s, and helped to inspire new constitutions in Haiti, Poland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and elsewhere. By 1820, according to one calculation, more than sixty new constitutions had been attempted within Continental Europe alone, and this is probably an underestimate. At least a further eighty constitutions were implemented between 1820 and 1850, many of them in Latin America. The spread of written constitutions proved in time almost unstoppable, and Palmer left his readers in no doubt that this outcome could be traced back to the Revolution of 1789, and still more to the Revolution of 1776. Despite resistance by entrenched elites, and especially from Britain, “the greatest single champion of the European counter-revolution,” a belief was in being by 1800, Palmer argued, that “democracy was a matter of concern to the world as a whole, that it was a thing of the future, [and] that while it was blocked in other countries the United States should be its refuge.”

MATHEMATICAL VISUALIZATION AND ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP STUDIES: IMAGE PROCESSING IN THE UNITED STATES, EUROPE, JAPAN AND AUSTRALIA

1994 ◽  
Vol 02 (01) ◽  
pp. 509-533
Author(s):  
JOSE ALONSO ◽  
W BYGRAVE ◽  
L M GILLIN
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
Dimensional Space ◽  
Geographical Location ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mathematical Visualization ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Executive Officers

Statistics and computer graphics, using linear and non-linear techniques, have been applied to entrepreneurial survey data in a study of the image analysis industry. Chief Executive Officers and Directors of Research have been interviewed in the United States, Europe, Japan and Australia. During the interview, a long questionnaire was completed. A mathematical model in terms of motivation, resources and performance measures has been developed to evaluate company positioning, and for future implementation as an expert system for high technology investment evaluation. A set of indices, derived using cluster and principal component analyses, describes groupings of variables which can be used to find the locus of a company position in an n-dimensional space. This position helps to establish whether the requisite technical, knowledge, marketing and financial infrastructures of the company are in keeping with the n-dimensional surfaces established by other companies in the field. These surfaces are then visualized using polynomial and Fourier parametric methods. Stratifications of the database by culture (as determined by geographical location), manufacturer-user-integrator classification, measures of innovation, and modes of deployment of financial resources are studied in terms of their taxonomic and performance characterisation abilities. Preliminary analyses reveal noticeable clustering of motivational variables by culture.

A Case Study in Federalism - the United States and Michigan Constitutions: Not Double Vision, Double Constitutions

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-219
Author(s):  
MICHAEL WARREN
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
Compare And Contrast

ABSTRACT Each citizen in America lives under two Constitutions - the United States, federal Constitution which applies to all citizens, and the constitution of the state in which the citizen lives. Often overlooked and basically unknown, the state constitutions play a vital role in governance and preserving our unalienable rights. Perhaps the best way to understand each constitution is to compare and contrast them. Accordingly, as a case study, this article examines the age, length, predecessors, drafting process, conventions, ratification process, and amendment procedures of the State of Michigan Constitution of 1963 and the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, this article examines how each of these constitutions addresses the separation of powers, legislature, executive, judiciary, local government, transportation, education, finance, taxation, and the protection of unalienable rights. Armed with this understanding, we will be better informed citizens, and more ably equipped to participate in self-governance and protect the unalienable rights of the citizenry. Note: At times this article quotes constitutional text which refers to “he” or “him.” The grammatical convention at the time was to make masculine all generic gender references. That this article quotes the text does not equate to an endorsement of the convention nor did the drafters intend that only men could serve as public officials.

scholarly journals The Background of American Federalism

1918 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew C. McLaughlin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Difficulty ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Careful Study ◽  
French And Indian War ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
Federal Organization ◽  
Indian War ◽  
American Federalism

The purpose of this paper is to make plain two facts: first, that the essential qualities of American federal organization were largely the product of the practices of the old British empire as it existed before 1764; second, that the discussions of the generation from the French and Indian war to the adoption of the federal Constitution, and, more particularly, the discussions in the ten or twelve years before independence, were over the problem of imperial organization. The center of this problem was the difficulty of recognizing federalism; and, though there was great difficulty in grasping the principle, the idea of federalism went over from the old empire, through discussion into the Constitution of the United States. By federalism is meant, of course, that system of political order in which powers of government are separated and distinguished and in which these powers are distributed among governments, each government having its quota of authority and each its distinct sphere of activity.We all remember very well that, until about thirty years ago, it was common to think of the United States Constitution as if it were “stricken off in a given time by the brain and purpose of man.” About that time there began a careful study of the background of constitutional provisions and especially of the specific make-up of the institutions provided for by the instrument.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document