issue70

423165179UID: 2649312

TOPIC: ISSUE70 - "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five
years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

Should we use the election expiration of office terms system? Should we change our leadership after five years term? The
issue raised a complex question between terms of office and the quality of leadership. For my part, I foundmentally  
agree with the notion this issue brought up.

There are two main arguments to support the issue raised notion. The threshold one is that two long leading term may
actually brings leaders many bad habits, such as arrogant, greedy, wasteful and so on. The leaders of acient Rome was
used to be diligent and plain when the rome was first built, the acient rome had even found the way to transfer the hot
water to everywhere, however after several satisfactory and peaceful years,. the leaders were so drug in the comfortable
lives that have lose their energy and vigilance, finally the ancient rome was occupied by the Greek armies. According to
that, there is a saying that:" accient rome is losed because of the hot water."  If acient Rome use election expiration of
office term systems and make the officials do not be ease, it may get a better result.   

The second is that change leadership regularlly can help make a orgnization full of creativity and energy through the
getting in of fresh blood. A old leader may be experised, while he may be also suffering from health problems, doubts of
unchangable in policies by citizens/his emploees, and press from the new generation leaders. He may even reject new
ideas or new things since he doesnot have enough energy which has been used up by the long time leading expercience.  
From the terms' changing of the American presient, we realized the benifit of election expiration of office terms. And
President Obama, as our middle-aged president, lets us know the advantage a man who is full of energy and wisdom can
bring us.

Otherwise, the notion I raise above doesnot equal to we should change leadership in every five years in any profession. For my part, even if five years seems a appropriate time, the term should be decided up to the professions. If we need to
choose leaders in an area that full of challenges and counts the energy and creativity most, we may reelect leader rank in a
shorter time, like three or four years. If we need to choose leaders in an area that expercience is the most important, we
may delay that to a longer time, like six or eight years. We can also implement that one can be reappointed consecutively
if he is outstanding in leading and show enough energy to provied for his next term. Albeit, in order to provide this
reappointed consecutively system donot mean another changless management, we should set the deadline of one  
person's terms.

In addition, even if we use the regularlly reelection system, we should pay attention to the connection between the last
and new leader, the last leader should tell his successor his experience and impression about his leading term for the
sucessor to take over work more quickly.

To sum up, election expiration of office terms is a gainful choice, while the its length is depend on the proffessions. We
need to implement this system totally, to ensure the fair and democracy of the process of reelection as well as the
connection between the old leader and his successor.

david36355UID: 2603992

……………………………………
= =我还是传在附件儿里好了。