George W. Bush as a 3 Term President?

In a Letter to the Editors of the March 5th, 2006 edition of the Toledo Blade, a Maumee resident poised the question...

Third term of office for George W. Bush?

It has been suggested that President George W. Bush run for a
third term on the premise that his first term does not count in asmuch as he was appointed by the Supreme Court, not elected.

In my view, there is a basis for this in the Constitution. If a vice president succeeds to the presidency because of the death of the president, the term of office thereby filled by the vice president does not count as his or her allotted two terms.

Since this would require an interpretation of the Constitution by the Supreme Court, recently enhanced by two new appointees, the idea has some validity.

While this may be wishful thinking on the writers part, I believe his premise for the question is somewhat askew. The writer states...

"his first term does not count in asmuch as he was appointed by the Supreme Court"

The Supreme Court did not appoint the President to the Office. According to Wikipedia On December 9, the United States Supreme Court unanimously granted Bush's emergency plea for a stay of the Florida Supreme Court recount ruling, stopping the incomplete recount. On December 12, the United States Supreme Court handed down its ruling in favor of Bush by a 5-4 vote, effectively ending the legal review of the vote count with Bush in the lead. Seven of the nine justices cited differing vote-counting standards from county to county and the lack of a single judicial officer to oversee the recount, both of which, they ruled, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. The crucial 5 to 4 decision held that insufficient time remained to implement a unified standard and therefore all recounts must stop.

In a nutshell...The Supreme Court only stopped the recount and let the election results stand. Not appoint G.W. Bush to the presidency.

I believe his interpretation of the constitution is also somewhat askew. The Twenty Second amendment reads:

Section 1
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

Now lets assume for a moment and by some stretch of the imagination that the writer is correct in his belief that the President was appointed. He believes that...

"If a vice president succeeds to the presidency because of the death of the president, the term of office thereby filled by the vice president does not count as his or her allotted two terms. "

Section One of the amendment clearly states

"no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."

Therefore, the fact that President Bush served for a full 4 years in his first term would prevent him from running for a third term. His re-election in 2004 would be counted as his allotted one term of being elected to the office.