Question about US President (Not about G.W.Bush)

[CDN_dancer]

<p>As most people know, one of the requirements for US presidential candidates is that they must be American-born citizens. If they are naturalized citizens, then they are ineligible to run for president.</p>

<p>Does anyone know why this rule was put into place? Do you agree with it? Why or why not?</p>

[nahrafsfa]

<p>i don’t know the exact reason, but I think it was a precaution to guard against nationalist Europeans taking power…in the 18th/19th centuries…immigration requirements were more or less laxed…some crazy Tory with full allegiance to England could run for president and turn the state over to British power, for example…also…i think there was a widespread belief that being born in the U.S. signified an increased level of loyalty to America and the American principle of governance.</p>

[MzLover3]

<p>the GOP will probably move on this issue within months so that their beloved Governator can run</p>

[CC_Admin]

<p>During an intense debate over how the president was to be elected, James Madison made [a</a> very interesting and applicable observation](<a href=“http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_2-3s2.html]a”>Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3: Records of the Federal Convention). He was speaking in opposition to a congressional elections for the presidency.</p>

<p>

The Ministers of foreign powers would have and make use of, the opportunity to to mix their intrigues & influence with the Election. Limited as the powers of the Executive are, it will be an object of great moment with the great rival powers of Europe who have American possessions, to have at the head of our Governmt. a man attached to their respective politics & interests. No pains, nor perhaps expence, will be spared, to gain from the Legislature an appointmt. favorable to their wishes. Germany & Poland are witnesses of this danger. In the former, the election of the Head of the Empire, till it became in a manner hereditary, interested all Europe, and was much influenced by foreign interference–In the latter, altho’ the elective Magistrate has very little real power, his election has at all times produced the most eager interference of forign princes, and has in fact at length slid entirely into foreign hands.

</p>

<p>Forrest McDonald argues in Novus Ordo Seclorum that this point was well-recieved by the convention, and “affrighted a number of delegates into moving toward a decentralized election” (246). It’s certain that this same fear was a motivating factor in inserting that provision. Since the details of presidential elections were drawn up in a compromise committee, it’s probable that they inserted that in order to appease worried delegates and build in another safeguard against foreign manipulation. Other concerns (such as avoiding a situation of divided loyalty) were probably involved as well, but foreign intrigue seems to have been the most oft mentioned one.</p>

<p>See also [url=<a href=“http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_5s2.html]here[/url”>Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5: Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1472--73]here[/url</a>].</p>

<p>

But the general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely be doubted by any sound statesman. It cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe. Germany, Poland, and even the pontificate of Rome, are sad, but instructive examples of the enduring mischiefs arising from this source.

</p>

<p>To which one might add Spain. Wars over Spanish succession have been among the most geopolitically important events in European history. Bismarck exploited the throne of Spain, for instance, to directly cause the Franco-Prussian war. And, of course, the war of Spanish succession finally brought down King Louis XIV. The new republic would hardly have wanted to become such a focal point for great power contention in the Americas.</p>