Answer: When the incumbent was Ronald Reagan.

The Republicans were responsible for the term limits on the Presidency because they got in a snit over FDR's four consecutive electoral wins. I remember the talk of repealing that amendment once there was a Republican incumbent that was considered electable for 3 terms. If that isn't politically convenient support for altering the Law -- not once, mind you, but twice (though only one amendment) -- I don't know what is.

Republicans gerrymander too. Take a look at the redistricting controversy in Pennsylvania. To quote:

The [Federal] law created [US Congressional] districts that are within 10 residents of the state average of 646,898.



Pennsylvania's 21 congressional districts shrink to 19 in early 2003 because of slow population growth.

[US District Judge] Rambo and [US Circuit Judge] Nygaard said that means that to write a plan that deviates from the average population, only four incumbents should be combined into two districts.



But the Pennsylvania plan, considered the most GOP-favoring in the nation, combined six Democratic incumbents into three districts, while creating two new districts.

It also puts a seventh Democratic incumbent, Rep. Tim Holden, D-Schuylkill, into a GOP-favoring district with 10-term incumbent Rep. George W. Gekas, R-Harrisburg. Gekas and Holden have been campaigning for weeks.

Political analysts said the Pennsylvania plan turns a delegation where Republicans hold a 10-9 edge into at least a 13-6 GOP advantage by 2003.

"It's clear ... that these two judges just don't like our plan,"

[PA Senate majority leader David] Brightbill [a Republican] said. He later added, "We are legally allowed to gerrymander for political purposes."

I just love it that Republicans, such as our august state Senate majority leader here in Pennsylvania, claim one set of standards for their own political actions ("legal"="above reproach") whereas if the Democrats play the same game by the same rules, suddenly "legal"="immoral smokescreen of unfairness". LOL

It's almost as funny as "policy disagreement"="unpatriotic".

Regards--
Mary Anne