Home > Argomenti vari > e Schwartzy adesso lo vogliono presidente!

e Schwartzy adesso lo vogliono presidente!

14 Gennaio 2007

interessante editoriale comparso oggi sul sito web del Los Angeles Time.
l’autore si chiede se non sarebbe ora di modificare una delle regole della costituzione americana che vieta a tutti i “non- native american” di concorrere per l’elezione come presidente degli USA.
porta a suo credito il fatto che durante i suoi anni come governatore della California ( è appena stato rieletto al suo secondo mandato nello stato più popoloso degli Usa) mr Schwarzenegger sia riuscito o abbia comunque impostato cambi radicali nella sanità, per l’ecologia e nelle infrastrutture dello stato.
Riuscendo a lavorare con l’opposizione in modo che è stato preso ad esempio dai governatori di molti altri stati americani.
E considera che questo articolo della Costituzione, scritta nel 18esimo secolo, dovrebbe ora essere riveduto in funzione del fatto che la confederazione di stati è molto cambiata da allora.
E’ giusto discriminare qualcuno che magari è solo nato in un altro paese ma che è poi cresciuto negli Usa, come un “non native american” e quindi precludergli l’ opportunità di diventare presidente, si chiede il giornalista?
un articolo che farà discutere e che, rivisto nei termini, può interessare anche l’Europa e gli sviluppi demografici multietnici del vecchio continente.

in definitiva, vedere l’ex-Terminator (con un passato da attore e “natural born austriaco”) che giura come presidente visto in prospettiva, sarà come rivedere il cowboy Reagan (anche lui con un passato da attore ma “natural born american”) conquistare la Casa Bianca dopo qualche decennio..

l’articolo completo lo trovate qui:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-ed-arnold14jan14,0,7435822.story?coll=la-home-commentary

**********************************************

Left out in ’08
Arnold Schwarzenegger can’t run for president because the founding fathers didn’t want a foreign king.
January 14, 2007

THE GOVERNOR OF the nation’s largest state was reelected in a landslide in November, even though his Republican Party is a minority in California. He works with Democrats in a way that offers the rest of the country a model of much-needed bipartisanship. To kick off his second term, he has proposed the most ambitious healthcare and environmental reforms in the country, and he is also committed to a massive reconstruction of the state’s infrastructure.

Yet, oddly enough, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is not on the list of potential presidential candidates in 2008.

Why? Because the founders were worried in the 18th century that our fledgling nation might go the way of Poland and be overtaken by a foreign monarchy. Hence the constitutional qualifier that only “natural-born citizens” are eligible for the presidency of the United States.

In their wisdom, however, the Constitution’s authors adopted a mechanism for the nation’s founding document to be amended. Amendments should be undertaken sparingly, we agree, but it’s a good thing that slavery was done away with and that suffrage has been expanded.

And now that we can all rest assured that no foreign monarch is going to move into the White House, it’s long past due for this nation of immigrants to amend the Constitution to allow naturalized Americans to aspire to the presidency. This is precisely the type of defining issue ? what it means to be American ? that the amendment process was designed to address.

Supporting Schwarzenegger for governor (we did) does not necessarily lead to supporting him for president (we don’t ? yet). But why should Californians have their governor sidelined from the race? And why can’t voters across the country be entrusted to decide for themselves whether the governor of California is sufficiently “American” to earn their vote? It’s insulting, really.

Yes, the nation will manage without Schwarzenegger at the helm. But his situation is a reminder of this constitutional flaw. The issue is also important at a symbolic level. It isn’t that there aren’t enough qualified “natural-born” Americans to run for the highest office in the land, it’s that there is an asterisk attached to the citizenship of many great Americans.

Think about it. Someone could come to the U.S. at the age of 2 from Britain or China or Peru, become a citizen, join the military, win a Medal of Honor, cure cancer ? but that person would still not be “good enough” for the White House.

One of the exceptional qualities of this meritocratic nation of immigrants is its sense of possibility. Americans like to tell their kids that they can be anything they want to be when they grow up ? including president. But for millions of patriotic Americans, the Constitution says otherwise. The idea of citizenship only as a birthright is a decidedly foreign notion. And the idea that voters cannot elect as their leader a naturalized citizen is decidedly undemocratic.

That’s why California’s representatives in Washington should support a constitutional amendment. If the United States is a nation of immigrants, California is a state of immigrants. And California leaders who want to hold on to the 18th century prohibition against naturalized citizens running for the presidency are not doing a very good job representing their constituents.

We asked every member of Congress representing California two questions: 1) As a Californian, do you think it’s fair that our governor can’t run for president because he’s a naturalized citizen? And 2) Would you support a constitutional amendment to allow naturalized citizens to seek the presidency?

We have posted their answers on our website at latimes.com/opinion.

continua>

I commenti sono chiusi.