WEBVTT - Is a third Trump term possible?

0:00:00.520 --> 0:00:04.000
<v Speaker 1>Already and this is the daily This is the Daily

0:00:04.120 --> 0:00:06.840
<v Speaker 1>ohs oh, now it makes sense.

0:00:14.760 --> 0:00:17.400
<v Speaker 2>Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Wednesday,

0:00:17.480 --> 0:00:20.120
<v Speaker 2>the twenty ninth of October. I'm Emma Gillespie.

0:00:20.320 --> 0:00:21.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm beliefit Simon's.

0:00:22.040 --> 0:00:25.759
<v Speaker 2>US President Donald Trump has once again refused to rule

0:00:25.800 --> 0:00:29.200
<v Speaker 2>out running for a third term, telling reporters.

0:00:28.720 --> 0:00:30.760
<v Speaker 3>This week he would love to do it.

0:00:31.160 --> 0:00:34.360
<v Speaker 2>US presidents are restricted to a two term limit.

0:00:34.320 --> 0:00:36.080
<v Speaker 3>But could Trump change that?

0:00:36.680 --> 0:00:39.320
<v Speaker 2>Today we are going to break down what the US

0:00:39.400 --> 0:00:44.320
<v Speaker 2>Constitution says about presidential terms, the likelihood of anything changing,

0:00:44.760 --> 0:00:47.680
<v Speaker 2>and take a look at how Australia's system compares.

0:00:52.240 --> 0:00:54.680
<v Speaker 1>Emma, this is a conversation that I feel like has

0:00:54.680 --> 0:00:57.400
<v Speaker 1>come up a few times in relation to Trump. But

0:00:57.440 --> 0:00:59.400
<v Speaker 1>do you want to walk us through why we are

0:00:59.440 --> 0:01:01.960
<v Speaker 1>talking bout it today? What has happened this week?

0:01:02.240 --> 0:01:02.960
<v Speaker 3>Yes? So.

0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:06.440
<v Speaker 2>US President Donald Trump was speaking to reporters on his

0:01:06.680 --> 0:01:09.600
<v Speaker 2>plane Air Force one, on Monday. He was on his

0:01:09.640 --> 0:01:13.600
<v Speaker 2>way to Japan and reporters on board asked him about

0:01:13.600 --> 0:01:16.360
<v Speaker 2>the possibility of running for a third term, so that

0:01:16.400 --> 0:01:18.240
<v Speaker 2>would be in twenty twenty eight.

0:01:18.680 --> 0:01:21.520
<v Speaker 3>Here is what he said, I would love to do it.

0:01:22.440 --> 0:01:24.600
<v Speaker 3>I have my best snubbers. Ever, it's very terrible. I

0:01:24.600 --> 0:01:25.800
<v Speaker 3>have my best snubb receipt.

0:01:26.680 --> 0:01:30.000
<v Speaker 1>You read it. Am I not.

0:01:30.080 --> 0:01:31.880
<v Speaker 3>Ruling it out. You'll have to tell me.

0:01:31.959 --> 0:01:33.360
<v Speaker 1>All I can tell you is that we have a

0:01:34.480 --> 0:01:37.319
<v Speaker 1>great group of people which stay dout bye.

0:01:37.520 --> 0:01:40.800
<v Speaker 2>They He's talking about the Democrats, and that great group

0:01:40.880 --> 0:01:44.160
<v Speaker 2>he described includes Vice President j. D. Vance and the

0:01:44.200 --> 0:01:46.240
<v Speaker 2>current Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

0:01:46.680 --> 0:01:50.280
<v Speaker 1>And this isn't the first time that Trump has floated

0:01:50.360 --> 0:01:51.360
<v Speaker 1>this idea, right.

0:01:51.520 --> 0:01:54.800
<v Speaker 2>Not at all. In fact, far from the first time.

0:01:55.000 --> 0:01:59.880
<v Speaker 2>Trump has actually repeatedly teased this idea of a third term,

0:02:00.080 --> 0:02:03.400
<v Speaker 2>even since before he won a second presidential term. So

0:02:03.480 --> 0:02:07.200
<v Speaker 2>in twenty eighteen, that was during his first term as president,

0:02:07.600 --> 0:02:11.959
<v Speaker 2>he commended Chinese President Jijinping for being a quote president

0:02:12.080 --> 0:02:15.600
<v Speaker 2>for life, adding that maybe we'll give that a shot someday.

0:02:15.919 --> 0:02:18.120
<v Speaker 2>So this goes all the way back to then. At

0:02:18.120 --> 0:02:21.480
<v Speaker 2>a twenty nineteen rally, Trump told students chanting four more

0:02:21.600 --> 0:02:25.280
<v Speaker 2>years that they should be saying sixteen more years. And

0:02:25.360 --> 0:02:28.840
<v Speaker 2>more recently, he told NBC in April that there are

0:02:29.240 --> 0:02:31.640
<v Speaker 2>methods that could allow him to serve again, but he

0:02:31.680 --> 0:02:34.560
<v Speaker 2>didn't elaborate any further on what that would look like

0:02:35.040 --> 0:02:37.320
<v Speaker 2>he has an online merch site where you can buy

0:02:37.440 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 2>Trump twenty twenty eight hats and T shirts right now.

0:02:40.600 --> 0:02:42.440
<v Speaker 3>Really, that's your prerogative. I don't know that.

0:02:42.480 --> 0:02:45.960
<v Speaker 1>So you can buy Trump twenty twenty eight hats right now.

0:02:45.880 --> 0:02:48.000
<v Speaker 2>Yep, right now, if you go online to his store

0:02:48.040 --> 0:02:49.440
<v Speaker 2>and you want to do that. I'm not sure what

0:02:49.440 --> 0:02:53.120
<v Speaker 2>the shipping to Australia is like. And finally, Trump's former

0:02:53.160 --> 0:02:56.160
<v Speaker 2>White House chief strategist, a guy called Steve Bannon, who

0:02:56.200 --> 0:02:59.280
<v Speaker 2>you may remember, he said on a podcast this week

0:02:59.440 --> 0:03:02.639
<v Speaker 2>that quote, Trump is going to be president in twenty

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:05.240
<v Speaker 2>eight and people ought to just get accommodated with that.

0:03:05.680 --> 0:03:08.520
<v Speaker 2>At the appropriate time, will lay out what the plan is.

0:03:08.680 --> 0:03:11.000
<v Speaker 2>But there is a plan, he said.

0:03:11.160 --> 0:03:14.560
<v Speaker 1>Wow, And I think we should explain why it's not

0:03:14.639 --> 0:03:17.840
<v Speaker 1>currently possible for Trump actually to run for a third term,

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:21.320
<v Speaker 1>and also acknowledge that it's different here in Australia. You

0:03:21.440 --> 0:03:24.600
<v Speaker 1>can be Prime minister for however long you want, or

0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:26.840
<v Speaker 1>however long the public wants you to be the leader

0:03:26.880 --> 0:03:29.720
<v Speaker 1>of the country. Yes, but in the US it's actually

0:03:29.919 --> 0:03:32.240
<v Speaker 1>not legally possible.

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:32.639
<v Speaker 3>Right now, yeap.

0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:36.320
<v Speaker 2>And that is per the US Constitution, which is very

0:03:36.320 --> 0:03:39.560
<v Speaker 2>clear on this there is an amendment in that Constitution,

0:03:39.680 --> 0:03:43.400
<v Speaker 2>the twenty second Amendment, which states, and I quote, no

0:03:43.560 --> 0:03:45.960
<v Speaker 2>person shall be elected to the office of the President

0:03:46.200 --> 0:03:49.600
<v Speaker 2>more than twice. This is an amendment that was formalized

0:03:49.640 --> 0:03:52.600
<v Speaker 2>in nineteen fifty one, and that was a few years

0:03:52.600 --> 0:03:56.440
<v Speaker 2>after President F. D. Roosevelt won an unprecedented third term

0:03:56.480 --> 0:03:59.800
<v Speaker 2>in nineteen forty followed by a fourth term in nineteen

0:03:59.840 --> 0:04:03.560
<v Speaker 2>five forty four. But before that, presidents had traditionally served

0:04:03.600 --> 0:04:07.280
<v Speaker 2>two terms, and the twenty second Amendment formalized that. It

0:04:07.480 --> 0:04:11.280
<v Speaker 2>enshrined that tradition into law. Just a quick note on

0:04:11.320 --> 0:04:14.600
<v Speaker 2>the Constitution and its importance or the reason it's so

0:04:14.640 --> 0:04:18.839
<v Speaker 2>significant in this case. It's basically the supreme law of

0:04:18.880 --> 0:04:21.719
<v Speaker 2>the Land of America. That's how it's described. So this

0:04:21.839 --> 0:04:24.800
<v Speaker 2>is a document that acts as the fundamental framework for

0:04:25.040 --> 0:04:28.599
<v Speaker 2>the US government the legal system, and also sets out

0:04:28.600 --> 0:04:31.920
<v Speaker 2>the guaranteed basic rights and freedoms of the American people.

0:04:32.279 --> 0:04:34.840
<v Speaker 1>We'll be right back with more on today's deep dive,

0:04:34.880 --> 0:04:40.839
<v Speaker 1>but first, here is a quick message from today's sponsor. So,

0:04:40.920 --> 0:04:46.440
<v Speaker 1>the Constitution explicitly forbids third term presidencies, but are there

0:04:46.480 --> 0:04:48.120
<v Speaker 1>any potential loopholes?

0:04:48.560 --> 0:04:51.880
<v Speaker 2>This has been the subject of a lot of scrutiny

0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:55.080
<v Speaker 2>and discussion in recent months, and there has been some

0:04:55.520 --> 0:04:59.520
<v Speaker 2>conversation about the exact wording. So the amendment says no

0:04:59.720 --> 0:05:03.239
<v Speaker 2>person shall be elected to the office more than twice,

0:05:03.720 --> 0:05:07.080
<v Speaker 2>but some legal scholars are asking whether there's a distinction

0:05:07.200 --> 0:05:11.720
<v Speaker 2>between being elected to the presidency and serving as president.

0:05:12.120 --> 0:05:15.960
<v Speaker 2>So I'll explain this through a theoretical scenario. And this

0:05:16.040 --> 0:05:19.159
<v Speaker 2>has been floated by some in the US. It's about

0:05:19.160 --> 0:05:21.960
<v Speaker 2>whether a two term president could actually become president for

0:05:22.000 --> 0:05:25.839
<v Speaker 2>a third term through the office of the vice president. So,

0:05:25.920 --> 0:05:30.200
<v Speaker 2>for example, if Trump ran for vice president in twenty

0:05:30.200 --> 0:05:34.279
<v Speaker 2>twenty eight, which legally he could, and he was elected

0:05:34.360 --> 0:05:37.120
<v Speaker 2>and he was serving with someone like JD. Vance or

0:05:37.120 --> 0:05:41.280
<v Speaker 2>Marco Rubio, if something happened to the president, Trump as

0:05:41.400 --> 0:05:45.160
<v Speaker 2>VP would then take over. That is how that role functions,

0:05:45.680 --> 0:05:49.360
<v Speaker 2>or if the president resigned on day one. So that's

0:05:49.600 --> 0:05:52.160
<v Speaker 2>a possible way that it could all play out. Trump

0:05:52.279 --> 0:05:56.560
<v Speaker 2>had previously said he was openly considering that option, but

0:05:56.720 --> 0:05:59.200
<v Speaker 2>when asked about it this week, he did rule that

0:05:59.279 --> 0:05:59.920
<v Speaker 2>plan out.

0:06:00.200 --> 0:06:02.880
<v Speaker 3>He called it quote too cute of an idea.

0:06:03.360 --> 0:06:08.000
<v Speaker 1>And I guess the obvious question is can the Constitution change.

0:06:08.440 --> 0:06:12.760
<v Speaker 1>Although if the US Constitution is anything like the Australian Constitution,

0:06:12.920 --> 0:06:15.719
<v Speaker 1>I imagine that is a very difficult process.

0:06:16.080 --> 0:06:18.080
<v Speaker 3>Yes, it is a difficult process.

0:06:18.200 --> 0:06:21.520
<v Speaker 2>It's difficult in different ways in the US Wich I'll explain,

0:06:22.000 --> 0:06:25.240
<v Speaker 2>But that is the only legitimate path for Trump to

0:06:25.360 --> 0:06:28.760
<v Speaker 2>secure a third term, and it would be extremely difficult

0:06:28.800 --> 0:06:32.880
<v Speaker 2>because amending the Constitution in the US requires support from

0:06:32.960 --> 0:06:35.679
<v Speaker 2>two thirds of the House of Representatives the lower house,

0:06:36.080 --> 0:06:38.479
<v Speaker 2>and two thirds of the Senate the upper house.

0:06:38.680 --> 0:06:40.880
<v Speaker 3>So basically you need more than.

0:06:40.800 --> 0:06:44.560
<v Speaker 2>A majority of politicians in both houses to support a

0:06:44.600 --> 0:06:48.960
<v Speaker 2>prospective amendment, which is incredibly rare. How rare it is

0:06:49.200 --> 0:06:52.479
<v Speaker 2>only twenty seven amendments have been added to the US

0:06:52.560 --> 0:06:56.840
<v Speaker 2>Constitution since it was written in seventeen eighty seven. That's

0:06:56.880 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 2>over more than two hundred and thirty years. Twenty seven amendments.

0:07:00.120 --> 0:07:01.960
<v Speaker 1>Wow. So it is different to how it works in

0:07:02.000 --> 0:07:04.800
<v Speaker 1>Australia because in Australia you need the public's approval, but

0:07:04.920 --> 0:07:08.040
<v Speaker 1>here you need Congress's approval. And just to explain a

0:07:08.080 --> 0:07:11.320
<v Speaker 1>little bit further, Republicans don't currently have two thirds control

0:07:11.400 --> 0:07:13.200
<v Speaker 1>of the House or the Senate, which is why that

0:07:13.240 --> 0:07:14.880
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't be a likely option.

0:07:14.760 --> 0:07:17.560
<v Speaker 2>Exactly, and that's a kind of I suppose democratic protection

0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:20.320
<v Speaker 2>in the Constitution that it's not just about the government

0:07:20.360 --> 0:07:23.360
<v Speaker 2>of the day making a decision, but a significant majority

0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:26.120
<v Speaker 2>of elected officials contributing to that decision.

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:30.560
<v Speaker 1>And so realistically, is there enough momentum around this idea

0:07:30.680 --> 0:07:33.040
<v Speaker 1>for it to happen? I imagine not.

0:07:32.440 --> 0:07:34.560
<v Speaker 3>Not really at this stage.

0:07:34.600 --> 0:07:38.520
<v Speaker 2>But that doesn't mean that there aren't attempts happening within

0:07:38.680 --> 0:07:43.480
<v Speaker 2>Congress to secure an amendment to change this. So earlier

0:07:43.480 --> 0:07:47.280
<v Speaker 2>this year, a Republican Congressman by the name of Andy

0:07:47.400 --> 0:07:51.600
<v Speaker 2>Ogles introduced a resolution that would alter the twenty second

0:07:51.640 --> 0:07:56.200
<v Speaker 2>Amendment to allow presidents who serve two non consecutive terms

0:07:56.520 --> 0:08:00.360
<v Speaker 2>to run again. So under that plan, hypothetically Try could

0:08:00.440 --> 0:08:03.080
<v Speaker 2>complete this second term, he would be ruled out of

0:08:03.200 --> 0:08:05.640
<v Speaker 2>the next election, but would be eligible in the one

0:08:05.720 --> 0:08:09.920
<v Speaker 2>after that. But a few weeks after Ogles introduced that resolution,

0:08:10.480 --> 0:08:14.880
<v Speaker 2>we saw basically a counter resolution introduced by a Democratic

0:08:14.880 --> 0:08:18.720
<v Speaker 2>congressman by the name of Daniel Goldman. He introduced a

0:08:18.800 --> 0:08:22.520
<v Speaker 2>resolution to reaffirm the House of Representative support for the

0:08:22.520 --> 0:08:26.520
<v Speaker 2>twenty second Amendment and reaffirm that it quote prohibits President

0:08:26.520 --> 0:08:30.960
<v Speaker 2>Trump from running for president for another term, Goldman said

0:08:31.000 --> 0:08:34.319
<v Speaker 2>in a statement, the twenty second Amendment enshrines a fundamental

0:08:34.400 --> 0:08:38.679
<v Speaker 2>principle of our democracy. No president can serve for more

0:08:38.760 --> 0:08:43.040
<v Speaker 2>than two terms. So there is at the moment significant

0:08:43.040 --> 0:08:47.920
<v Speaker 2>political division going by just what these two opposing politicians

0:08:48.160 --> 0:08:49.280
<v Speaker 2>are doing and saying.

0:08:49.720 --> 0:08:52.959
<v Speaker 3>And the issue is highly unlikely.

0:08:52.600 --> 0:08:56.000
<v Speaker 2>To move in the coming months or years ahead of

0:08:56.000 --> 0:08:57.320
<v Speaker 2>that twenty twenty eight election.

0:08:57.600 --> 0:09:01.440
<v Speaker 1>But it is interesting that it is active conversation happening

0:09:01.520 --> 0:09:02.079
<v Speaker 1>right now.

0:09:02.000 --> 0:09:02.520
<v Speaker 3>Very much so.

0:09:02.720 --> 0:09:05.240
<v Speaker 2>And the more that Donald Trump makes comments like he

0:09:05.400 --> 0:09:07.439
<v Speaker 2>did this week saying he would love to run again,

0:09:07.880 --> 0:09:10.760
<v Speaker 2>you know, things happen in US politics that we never

0:09:10.840 --> 0:09:12.520
<v Speaker 2>expected to happen all the time.

0:09:12.640 --> 0:09:15.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and I've mentioned a few times how it is

0:09:16.000 --> 0:09:18.199
<v Speaker 1>here in Australia compared to how it is in the US.

0:09:18.440 --> 0:09:20.240
<v Speaker 1>Do you want to explain that a little bit more

0:09:20.360 --> 0:09:23.640
<v Speaker 1>about how terms work here in Australia.

0:09:23.800 --> 0:09:28.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Absolutely, So our system is completely different. We don't

0:09:28.160 --> 0:09:32.400
<v Speaker 2>have term limits on individual leadership roles at all, because

0:09:32.480 --> 0:09:36.160
<v Speaker 2>in fact, we don't have the presidential system, so there's

0:09:36.160 --> 0:09:39.280
<v Speaker 2>no limit how long someone can serve as prime minister.

0:09:39.840 --> 0:09:43.480
<v Speaker 2>The prime minister isn't directly elected by voters. As we know,

0:09:44.160 --> 0:09:46.800
<v Speaker 2>you know, they are the leader of the party that

0:09:46.840 --> 0:09:48.840
<v Speaker 2>wins the most support, so you know, the leader of

0:09:48.920 --> 0:09:51.360
<v Speaker 2>Labor or the leader of the coalition who win the

0:09:51.400 --> 0:09:54.120
<v Speaker 2>majority of seats in the House of Reps, that is

0:09:54.320 --> 0:09:57.160
<v Speaker 2>who becomes the Prime minister. But you know, as we

0:09:57.240 --> 0:10:01.840
<v Speaker 2>have seen, our government terms don't dictate our prime minister terms.

0:10:02.240 --> 0:10:04.599
<v Speaker 2>But as long as a leader of a party in

0:10:04.640 --> 0:10:08.319
<v Speaker 2>government maintains support, they can stay in that job indefinitely.

0:10:08.679 --> 0:10:11.800
<v Speaker 2>Our longest serving PM was Robert Menzies who served for

0:10:11.840 --> 0:10:12.959
<v Speaker 2>eighteen years.

0:10:13.200 --> 0:10:14.280
<v Speaker 1>That is a long time.

0:10:14.520 --> 0:10:17.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it is a very long time, especially by today's measure.

0:10:18.360 --> 0:10:21.720
<v Speaker 2>And John Howard served for eleven years. So really there's

0:10:21.760 --> 0:10:25.280
<v Speaker 2>nothing from stopping that from happening. Again, it's just unusual

0:10:25.320 --> 0:10:27.199
<v Speaker 2>that we see that kind of tenure in our two

0:10:27.280 --> 0:10:30.600
<v Speaker 2>major parties when it comes to individual leaders.

0:10:31.040 --> 0:10:33.800
<v Speaker 1>One thing that is also different with Australia system is

0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:37.360
<v Speaker 1>that our terms for leaders for prime ministers is three

0:10:37.440 --> 0:10:40.480
<v Speaker 1>years as opposed to four years in the US. But

0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:43.800
<v Speaker 1>I know there's been a conversation about potentially changing that.

0:10:44.240 --> 0:10:48.439
<v Speaker 2>Yes, so our terms are three years, but that's how

0:10:48.520 --> 0:10:52.080
<v Speaker 2>long a government governs for, not necessarily how long a

0:10:52.120 --> 0:10:53.160
<v Speaker 2>prime minister.

0:10:53.120 --> 0:10:54.280
<v Speaker 3>Leads for yes.

0:10:54.400 --> 0:10:58.640
<v Speaker 2>So both Prime Minister Anthony Albanesi and senior coalition officials

0:10:58.679 --> 0:11:02.880
<v Speaker 2>have previously rest support for changing to four year terms.

0:11:03.400 --> 0:11:07.160
<v Speaker 2>The argument here is that three years is too short

0:11:07.280 --> 0:11:11.240
<v Speaker 2>of a window for governments to really set out long

0:11:11.320 --> 0:11:15.920
<v Speaker 2>term policy and to really enact those long term policies. So,

0:11:16.080 --> 0:11:19.880
<v Speaker 2>you know, a changing constant election cycle, politicians spend a

0:11:19.960 --> 0:11:23.880
<v Speaker 2>year organizing, a year implementing policy, a year campaigning. The

0:11:23.960 --> 0:11:27.400
<v Speaker 2>eye is always on the next polling day rather than

0:11:27.480 --> 0:11:31.160
<v Speaker 2>you know, the shift in legislation and governing.

0:11:31.480 --> 0:11:33.880
<v Speaker 1>And if that was to change, what would that process

0:11:34.160 --> 0:11:36.040
<v Speaker 1>look like for how to change it?

0:11:36.360 --> 0:11:40.319
<v Speaker 2>So here, a change like that would require a referendum,

0:11:40.559 --> 0:11:43.960
<v Speaker 2>and as we know, to succeed a proposal needs a

0:11:44.040 --> 0:11:47.319
<v Speaker 2>majority of support in a majority of states. That old

0:11:47.400 --> 0:11:50.640
<v Speaker 2>chestnut that has proven to be very difficult in Australian history,

0:11:50.679 --> 0:11:54.280
<v Speaker 2>as we know. But I actually didn't know this until today.

0:11:54.600 --> 0:11:57.520
<v Speaker 2>In nineteen eighty eight, Prime Minister Bob Hawk put a

0:11:57.600 --> 0:12:02.720
<v Speaker 2>proposal to change to four year terms. Who a referendum, Surprise, surprise,

0:12:02.760 --> 0:12:03.120
<v Speaker 2>it failed.

0:12:03.160 --> 0:12:04.120
<v Speaker 3>I was gonna say, how'd that go?

0:12:05.120 --> 0:12:09.800
<v Speaker 2>It actually performed really badly. Some of the lowest yes

0:12:09.960 --> 0:12:15.640
<v Speaker 2>votes in Australia's referendum history. This proposal received overall a

0:12:15.720 --> 0:12:19.080
<v Speaker 2>thirty three percent national yes vote, but it did not

0:12:19.120 --> 0:12:20.920
<v Speaker 2>achieve a majority in any state.

0:12:21.240 --> 0:12:23.760
<v Speaker 1>I wonder why why were people so opposed to it.

0:12:23.960 --> 0:12:24.400
<v Speaker 3>I don't know.

0:12:24.640 --> 0:12:27.400
<v Speaker 2>I think now that we have the example of four

0:12:27.480 --> 0:12:31.000
<v Speaker 2>year terms in the US, it's maybe changed the way

0:12:31.040 --> 0:12:33.480
<v Speaker 2>we think. And I guess because we've had a lot

0:12:33.559 --> 0:12:37.280
<v Speaker 2>of fluctuation in our politics domestically for the last twenty

0:12:37.280 --> 0:12:40.240
<v Speaker 2>odd years. But a recent news poll conducted for The

0:12:40.280 --> 0:12:43.719
<v Speaker 2>Australian shows there is about fifty one percent support here

0:12:43.760 --> 0:12:47.000
<v Speaker 2>in Australia for four year terms. I wouldn't call that

0:12:47.080 --> 0:12:50.680
<v Speaker 2>overwhelming public enthusiasm. And there's also a bit of a

0:12:50.679 --> 0:12:53.400
<v Speaker 2>headache that this could cause in the Senate. So Upper

0:12:53.440 --> 0:12:56.360
<v Speaker 2>House terms are currently double the length of Lower House terms.

0:12:56.640 --> 0:12:59.640
<v Speaker 2>Foreign Minister Pennyonong has argued eight year terms are too long,

0:13:00.120 --> 0:13:02.920
<v Speaker 2>so there is a fair bit to it that, you know,

0:13:03.040 --> 0:13:05.440
<v Speaker 2>maybe we just can't be bothered to.

0:13:05.360 --> 0:13:07.800
<v Speaker 1>Deal with it fair enough.

0:13:07.920 --> 0:13:08.439
<v Speaker 3>That would be.

0:13:10.520 --> 0:13:13.840
<v Speaker 1>Two very different systems with very different debates going on.

0:13:14.040 --> 0:13:17.080
<v Speaker 1>Thank you for breaking that down, Emma, Thanks Billy. That's

0:13:17.120 --> 0:13:19.760
<v Speaker 1>all for today's deep dive. We'll be back this afternoon

0:13:19.800 --> 0:13:26.720
<v Speaker 1>with the headlines. Until then, have a great day. My

0:13:26.840 --> 0:13:29.720
<v Speaker 1>name is Lily Maddon and I'm a proud Arunda Bungelung

0:13:29.840 --> 0:13:34.160
<v Speaker 1>Caalcuttin woman from Gadigol Country. The Daily oz acknowledges that

0:13:34.240 --> 0:13:36.680
<v Speaker 1>this podcast is recorded on the lands of the Gadighl

0:13:36.720 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>people and pays respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait

0:13:40.080 --> 0:13:43.040
<v Speaker 1>Island and nations. We pay our respects to the first

0:13:43.040 --> 0:13:45.520
<v Speaker 1>peoples of these countries, both past and present.