Why the President Gets Four Years — and Why That Still Matters

(Image: NYT front page, January 8, 2026) 

With a president who appears comfortable testing institutional boundaries, it’s worth revisiting why the presidency is structured the way it is. The four-year presidential term and the later two-term limit—often taken for granted—were not inevitable. Both emerged from a persistent fear of concentrated executive power and of creating a king in all but name.

A Constitution Written in Fear of Power

When delegates gathered in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787, they had no clear model for an elected executive. Monarchies dominated the Western world, and existing republics offered cautionary tales rather than inspiration. The framers were starting from scratch—and arguing fiercely.

Early proposals varied wildly. Some delegates favored short three-year terms. Others supported seven-year terms, or even a single term with no reelection, fearing what one delegate called an “elective king” who would cling to power and establish a dynasty. At one point, seven-year terms were formally approved—but doubts lingered, especially about reelection and accountability (source).

Findings the Middle Ground

The core problem was balance. Short terms risked constant campaigning and weak leadership. Long terms risked corruption and consolidation of power. Over weeks of debate, proposals ranged from three years to fifteen years to lifetime appointments.

By late August, the convention settled on a compromise: a four-year term with the possibility of reelection. Alexander Hamilton defended this structure in Federalist No. 71, arguing that four years provided enough stability for decisive leadership while preserving accountability through elections. The term also fit neatly between the House’s two-year cycle and the Senate’s six-year terms, positioning the president between short-term public pressure and long-term national interests.

Limits, Traditions, and Guardrails

Notably, the Constitution originally placed no limit on how many times a president could be reelected. The framers trusted voters to prevent permanent rule. George Washington reinforced that trust by voluntarily stepping down after two terms, establishing a powerful norm that endured for nearly 150 years.

That tradition broke during World War II, when Franklin D. Roosevelt won third and fourth terms amid global crisis. After his presidency, concerns about executive overreach resurfaced. Congress responded by passing the 22nd Amendment in 1947, formally limiting presidents to two four-year terms.

Why This History Matters Now

The four-year term was designed as a safeguard—not too short to paralyze leadership, not too long to invite authoritarianism. It reflects a deliberate effort to restrain power while allowing it to function.

At a moment when presidential norms and limits are being tested, this history is a reminder: the system was built with skepticism, not blind trust. The boundaries matter precisely because those in power will always be tempted to push them.