Immediatly I had thought of President W. Bush. He had been lambasted at the time when it was found out that after the planes hit the World Trade Center towers that he didn't immediatly jump from from the event he was at and run back to Washington. Of course there is a major difference between the two: Bush was alread at the event when tragedy struck, while Obama left Washington in the midst of tragedy to go to an event. But it was the fact that Obama went to a fundraiser in the first place that got me thinking.
Ever since the Obama administration began, certain parties have lamented the presence of the 'never-ending campaign.' The Never-Ending Campaign is described as a sitting president, or office-holder, campaigning for the next election. The thought of that made me think of the Consuls of the ancient Roman Republic. In the Roman Republic, there were two Consuls, the CEOs of the Republic. But the important thing about these Consuls was that they were not allowed to serve in consequative terms. And I thought that that would be a great idea for US Presidents; forbid them from serving consequative terms.
Think about it, in this era of instantaneous mass communication, there is no worry about a national figure becoming obscur, especially if he remains relavant. So there is no need to allow for consequative terms. The benefits to this would be that the President wouldn't be worried about the next election, because he couldn't be on the ticket. Without that worry, he would only be concerned about good governance and good policy, especially if he wants his party to remain in the presidency. We would finally have a President that would have every incentive to be Presidential.
The only problem is that there could be an abuse of the Vice-Presidency. The former President could become the next Vice-President and become the power behind the throne, therefore having a hidden third term. But that could be nipped by forbidding a President from becoming Vice-President