Thanks for bumping up the subject. It's a good one, with no easy answers.

I understand the limiting, Tom, but on the growing global scale, 2 terms may not be enough. What about increasing 1 term to 6 years instead of 4?

This has possibilities. The idea of having a President who doesn't have to worry about getting reelected has both pros and cons. He could concentrate on the job for a change, but he might also pull off some bad stuff since he doesn't have to worry about voters any more.

On the other hand, I have not seen any radical changes in behavior on the part of Presidents in their second terms, either for better or worse, so maybe this is not a really important factor.

What you call restrictions, I call party control.

Not sure what you mean by this. Why term limits would either enhance or reduce the role of political parties is not clear. I was thinking about overall general restrictions, not just those on elections and terms. The whole point of the Constitution, boiled down to basics, was to list specifically those few things that citizens were NOT allowed to do, and list specifically those few things that governments WERE allowed to do.

As for party control, there are certainly rules in place (not part of the Constitution) that make it very difficult for third parties to get a toehold in the political process. I could see changing those, but the guys making the rules are the ones who benefit.