Speaker 1: Already and this is the daily This is the Daily
Speaker 1: ohs oh, now it makes sense.
Speaker 2: Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Wednesday,
Speaker 2: the twenty ninth of October. I'm Emma Gillespie.
Speaker 1: I'm beliefit Simon's.
Speaker 2: US President Donald Trump has once again refused to rule
Speaker 2: out running for a third term, telling reporters.
Speaker 3: This week he would love to do it.
Speaker 2: US presidents are restricted to a two term limit.
Speaker 3: But could Trump change that?
Speaker 2: Today we are going to break down what the US
Speaker 2: Constitution says about presidential terms, the likelihood of anything changing,
Speaker 2: and take a look at how Australia's system compares.
Speaker 1: Emma, this is a conversation that I feel like has
Speaker 1: come up a few times in relation to Trump. But
Speaker 1: do you want to walk us through why we are
Speaker 1: talking bout it today? What has happened this week?
Speaker 3: Yes? So.
Speaker 2: US President Donald Trump was speaking to reporters on his
Speaker 2: plane Air Force one, on Monday. He was on his
Speaker 2: way to Japan and reporters on board asked him about
Speaker 2: the possibility of running for a third term, so that
Speaker 2: would be in twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 3: Here is what he said, I would love to do it.
Speaker 3: I have my best snubbers. Ever, it's very terrible. I
Speaker 3: have my best snubb receipt.
Speaker 1: You read it. Am I not.
Speaker 3: Ruling it out. You'll have to tell me.
Speaker 1: All I can tell you is that we have a
Speaker 1: great group of people which stay dout bye.
Speaker 2: They He's talking about the Democrats, and that great group
Speaker 2: he described includes Vice President j. D. Vance and the
Speaker 2: current Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Speaker 1: And this isn't the first time that Trump has floated
Speaker 1: this idea, right.
Speaker 2: Not at all. In fact, far from the first time.
Speaker 2: Trump has actually repeatedly teased this idea of a third term,
Speaker 2: even since before he won a second presidential term. So
Speaker 2: in twenty eighteen, that was during his first term as president,
Speaker 2: he commended Chinese President Jijinping for being a quote president
Speaker 2: for life, adding that maybe we'll give that a shot someday.
Speaker 2: So this goes all the way back to then. At
Speaker 2: a twenty nineteen rally, Trump told students chanting four more
Speaker 2: years that they should be saying sixteen more years. And
Speaker 2: more recently, he told NBC in April that there are
Speaker 2: methods that could allow him to serve again, but he
Speaker 2: didn't elaborate any further on what that would look like
Speaker 2: he has an online merch site where you can buy
Speaker 2: Trump twenty twenty eight hats and T shirts right now.
Speaker 3: Really, that's your prerogative. I don't know that.
Speaker 1: So you can buy Trump twenty twenty eight hats right now.
Speaker 2: Yep, right now, if you go online to his store
Speaker 2: and you want to do that. I'm not sure what
Speaker 2: the shipping to Australia is like. And finally, Trump's former
Speaker 2: White House chief strategist, a guy called Steve Bannon, who
Speaker 2: you may remember, he said on a podcast this week
Speaker 2: that quote, Trump is going to be president in twenty
Speaker 2: eight and people ought to just get accommodated with that.
Speaker 2: At the appropriate time, will lay out what the plan is.
Speaker 2: But there is a plan, he said.
Speaker 1: Wow, And I think we should explain why it's not
Speaker 1: currently possible for Trump actually to run for a third term,
Speaker 1: and also acknowledge that it's different here in Australia. You
Speaker 1: can be Prime minister for however long you want, or
Speaker 1: however long the public wants you to be the leader
Speaker 1: of the country. Yes, but in the US it's actually
Speaker 1: not legally possible.
Speaker 3: Right now, yeap.
Speaker 2: And that is per the US Constitution, which is very
Speaker 2: clear on this there is an amendment in that Constitution,
Speaker 2: the twenty second Amendment, which states, and I quote, no
Speaker 2: person shall be elected to the office of the President
Speaker 2: more than twice. This is an amendment that was formalized
Speaker 2: in nineteen fifty one, and that was a few years
Speaker 2: after President F. D. Roosevelt won an unprecedented third term
Speaker 2: in nineteen forty followed by a fourth term in nineteen
Speaker 2: five forty four. But before that, presidents had traditionally served
Speaker 2: two terms, and the twenty second Amendment formalized that. It
Speaker 2: enshrined that tradition into law. Just a quick note on
Speaker 2: the Constitution and its importance or the reason it's so
Speaker 2: significant in this case. It's basically the supreme law of
Speaker 2: the Land of America. That's how it's described. So this
Speaker 2: is a document that acts as the fundamental framework for
Speaker 2: the US government the legal system, and also sets out
Speaker 2: the guaranteed basic rights and freedoms of the American people.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back with more on today's deep dive,
Speaker 1: but first, here is a quick message from today's sponsor. So,
Speaker 1: the Constitution explicitly forbids third term presidencies, but are there
Speaker 1: any potential loopholes?
Speaker 2: This has been the subject of a lot of scrutiny
Speaker 2: and discussion in recent months, and there has been some
Speaker 2: conversation about the exact wording. So the amendment says no
Speaker 2: person shall be elected to the office more than twice,
Speaker 2: but some legal scholars are asking whether there's a distinction
Speaker 2: between being elected to the presidency and serving as president.
Speaker 2: So I'll explain this through a theoretical scenario. And this
Speaker 2: has been floated by some in the US. It's about
Speaker 2: whether a two term president could actually become president for
Speaker 2: a third term through the office of the vice president. So,
Speaker 2: for example, if Trump ran for vice president in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty eight, which legally he could, and he was elected
Speaker 2: and he was serving with someone like JD. Vance or
Speaker 2: Marco Rubio, if something happened to the president, Trump as
Speaker 2: VP would then take over. That is how that role functions,
Speaker 2: or if the president resigned on day one. So that's
Speaker 2: a possible way that it could all play out. Trump
Speaker 2: had previously said he was openly considering that option, but
Speaker 2: when asked about it this week, he did rule that
Speaker 2: plan out.
Speaker 3: He called it quote too cute of an idea.
Speaker 1: And I guess the obvious question is can the Constitution change.
Speaker 1: Although if the US Constitution is anything like the Australian Constitution,
Speaker 1: I imagine that is a very difficult process.
Speaker 3: Yes, it is a difficult process.
Speaker 2: It's difficult in different ways in the US Wich I'll explain,
Speaker 2: But that is the only legitimate path for Trump to
Speaker 2: secure a third term, and it would be extremely difficult
Speaker 2: because amending the Constitution in the US requires support from
Speaker 2: two thirds of the House of Representatives the lower house,
Speaker 2: and two thirds of the Senate the upper house.
Speaker 3: So basically you need more than.
Speaker 2: A majority of politicians in both houses to support a
Speaker 2: prospective amendment, which is incredibly rare. How rare it is
Speaker 2: only twenty seven amendments have been added to the US
Speaker 2: Constitution since it was written in seventeen eighty seven. That's
Speaker 2: over more than two hundred and thirty years. Twenty seven amendments.
Speaker 1: Wow. So it is different to how it works in
Speaker 1: Australia because in Australia you need the public's approval, but
Speaker 1: here you need Congress's approval. And just to explain a
Speaker 1: little bit further, Republicans don't currently have two thirds control
Speaker 1: of the House or the Senate, which is why that
Speaker 1: wouldn't be a likely option.
Speaker 2: Exactly, and that's a kind of I suppose democratic protection
Speaker 2: in the Constitution that it's not just about the government
Speaker 2: of the day making a decision, but a significant majority
Speaker 2: of elected officials contributing to that decision.
Speaker 1: And so realistically, is there enough momentum around this idea
Speaker 1: for it to happen? I imagine not.
Speaker 3: Not really at this stage.
Speaker 2: But that doesn't mean that there aren't attempts happening within
Speaker 2: Congress to secure an amendment to change this. So earlier
Speaker 2: this year, a Republican Congressman by the name of Andy
Speaker 2: Ogles introduced a resolution that would alter the twenty second
Speaker 2: Amendment to allow presidents who serve two non consecutive terms
Speaker 2: to run again. So under that plan, hypothetically Try could
Speaker 2: complete this second term, he would be ruled out of
Speaker 2: the next election, but would be eligible in the one
Speaker 2: after that. But a few weeks after Ogles introduced that resolution,
Speaker 2: we saw basically a counter resolution introduced by a Democratic
Speaker 2: congressman by the name of Daniel Goldman. He introduced a
Speaker 2: resolution to reaffirm the House of Representative support for the
Speaker 2: twenty second Amendment and reaffirm that it quote prohibits President
Speaker 2: Trump from running for president for another term, Goldman said
Speaker 2: in a statement, the twenty second Amendment enshrines a fundamental
Speaker 2: principle of our democracy. No president can serve for more
Speaker 2: than two terms. So there is at the moment significant
Speaker 2: political division going by just what these two opposing politicians
Speaker 2: are doing and saying.
Speaker 3: And the issue is highly unlikely.
Speaker 2: To move in the coming months or years ahead of
Speaker 2: that twenty twenty eight election.
Speaker 1: But it is interesting that it is active conversation happening
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 3: Very much so.
Speaker 2: And the more that Donald Trump makes comments like he
Speaker 2: did this week saying he would love to run again,
Speaker 2: you know, things happen in US politics that we never
Speaker 2: expected to happen all the time.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I've mentioned a few times how it is
Speaker 1: here in Australia compared to how it is in the US.
Speaker 1: Do you want to explain that a little bit more
Speaker 1: about how terms work here in Australia.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Absolutely, So our system is completely different. We don't
Speaker 2: have term limits on individual leadership roles at all, because
Speaker 2: in fact, we don't have the presidential system, so there's
Speaker 2: no limit how long someone can serve as prime minister.
Speaker 2: The prime minister isn't directly elected by voters. As we know,
Speaker 2: you know, they are the leader of the party that
Speaker 2: wins the most support, so you know, the leader of
Speaker 2: Labor or the leader of the coalition who win the
Speaker 2: majority of seats in the House of Reps, that is
Speaker 2: who becomes the Prime minister. But you know, as we
Speaker 2: have seen, our government terms don't dictate our prime minister terms.
Speaker 2: But as long as a leader of a party in
Speaker 2: government maintains support, they can stay in that job indefinitely.
Speaker 2: Our longest serving PM was Robert Menzies who served for
Speaker 2: eighteen years.
Speaker 1: That is a long time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it is a very long time, especially by today's measure.
Speaker 2: And John Howard served for eleven years. So really there's
Speaker 2: nothing from stopping that from happening. Again, it's just unusual
Speaker 2: that we see that kind of tenure in our two
Speaker 2: major parties when it comes to individual leaders.
Speaker 1: One thing that is also different with Australia system is
Speaker 1: that our terms for leaders for prime ministers is three
Speaker 1: years as opposed to four years in the US. But
Speaker 1: I know there's been a conversation about potentially changing that.
Speaker 2: Yes, so our terms are three years, but that's how
Speaker 2: long a government governs for, not necessarily how long a
Speaker 2: prime minister.
Speaker 3: Leads for yes.
Speaker 2: So both Prime Minister Anthony Albanesi and senior coalition officials
Speaker 2: have previously rest support for changing to four year terms.
Speaker 2: The argument here is that three years is too short
Speaker 2: of a window for governments to really set out long
Speaker 2: term policy and to really enact those long term policies. So,
Speaker 2: you know, a changing constant election cycle, politicians spend a
Speaker 2: year organizing, a year implementing policy, a year campaigning. The
Speaker 2: eye is always on the next polling day rather than
Speaker 2: you know, the shift in legislation and governing.
Speaker 1: And if that was to change, what would that process
Speaker 1: look like for how to change it?
Speaker 2: So here, a change like that would require a referendum,
Speaker 2: and as we know, to succeed a proposal needs a
Speaker 2: majority of support in a majority of states. That old
Speaker 2: chestnut that has proven to be very difficult in Australian history,
Speaker 2: as we know. But I actually didn't know this until today.
Speaker 2: In nineteen eighty eight, Prime Minister Bob Hawk put a
Speaker 2: proposal to change to four year terms. Who a referendum, Surprise, surprise,
Speaker 2: it failed.
Speaker 3: I was gonna say, how'd that go?
Speaker 2: It actually performed really badly. Some of the lowest yes
Speaker 2: votes in Australia's referendum history. This proposal received overall a
Speaker 2: thirty three percent national yes vote, but it did not
Speaker 2: achieve a majority in any state.
Speaker 1: I wonder why why were people so opposed to it.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I think now that we have the example of four
Speaker 2: year terms in the US, it's maybe changed the way
Speaker 2: we think. And I guess because we've had a lot
Speaker 2: of fluctuation in our politics domestically for the last twenty
Speaker 2: odd years. But a recent news poll conducted for The
Speaker 2: Australian shows there is about fifty one percent support here
Speaker 2: in Australia for four year terms. I wouldn't call that
Speaker 2: overwhelming public enthusiasm. And there's also a bit of a
Speaker 2: headache that this could cause in the Senate. So Upper
Speaker 2: House terms are currently double the length of Lower House terms.
Speaker 2: Foreign Minister Pennyonong has argued eight year terms are too long,
Speaker 2: so there is a fair bit to it that, you know,
Speaker 2: maybe we just can't be bothered to.
Speaker 1: Deal with it fair enough.
Speaker 3: That would be.
Speaker 1: Two very different systems with very different debates going on.
Speaker 1: Thank you for breaking that down, Emma, Thanks Billy. That's
Speaker 1: all for today's deep dive. We'll be back this afternoon
Speaker 1: with the headlines. Until then, have a great day. My
Speaker 1: name is Lily Maddon and I'm a proud Arunda Bungelung
Speaker 1: Caalcuttin woman from Gadigol Country. The Daily oz acknowledges that
Speaker 1: this podcast is recorded on the lands of the Gadighl
Speaker 1: people and pays respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Speaker 1: Island and nations. We pay our respects to the first
Speaker 1: peoples of these countries, both past and present.