.
Hello, thanks for all the discussion about my question re Mrs Clinton and the 22nd Amendment. The point is quite simple — Jeb Bush and his brother are not the same legal person in the eyes of the law nor are the Bush father and son. But the Clintons may be, and may be by choice as many married couples in the US choose to be — e.g. observe their jointly filed tax returns (let alone informal talk about a co-presidency). Re the 22nd Amendment, ask the following hypothetical: suppose Barack Obama becomes President and wins re-election; after 8 years in the White House, his wife then decides she wants to try to be President and runs for the office. (Or suppose Laura Bush had done so in 2008). May the incumbent President campaign for his spouse? The 22nd Amendment was clearly intended to stop such things though the authors of the 22nd Amendment could not have foreseen such an eventuality. Certainly back then a President and First Lady were the same legal person for the purpose of the Amendment, and a presidential spouse would simply not have been so ambitious as to wish to return to the White House with her husband once she had left. (Of course Mrs Eisenhower had a prominent and dignified public role after she had been widowed.)
Re myself, yes I am not the businessman who owns an airline; I went in 1980 from Cambridge University where I worked for my PhD under Frank Hahn to Virginia Tech in Blacksburg to join Professor James Buchanan’s Center for Study of Public Chocie for two years as Visiting Research Associate. I did give a talk at GMU when they moved there in 1983. More at my blog www.independentindian.com