Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dem. Rep. Introduces Bill to Abolish Presidential Term Limits
The Blaze ^ | January 6, 2013 | Madeline Morganstern

Posted on 01/06/2013 10:12:27 AM PST by COUNTrecount

A Democratic congressman on Friday yet again introduced a resolution seeking to repeal the 22nd Amendment, thereby removing the limit on how many terms a president may serve in office.

It’s a regular occurrence for longtime Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.), who has introduced similar legislation every Congress going back at least through 2001.

The 22nd Amendment bars any president from serving more than two full terms in office. It was passed by Congress in 1947 and ratified in 1951 as a reaction to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s four-term presidency.

Amending the Constitution would require the approval of both the House and Senate and three-fourths of the states.

Democratic Congressman Jose Serrano Introduces Bill to Abolish Presidential Term Limits

Serrano’s latest effort, like previous attempts, has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee where it will most certainly languish and die. The resolution has no cosponsors.

Efforts to repeal the 22nd Amendment are nothing new. A 2005 attempt by Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) had bipartisan co-sponsorship that included Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) but went nowhere, as did a resolution introduced by Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in 1989.

The late Rep. Guy Vander Jagt, then the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, introduced legislation to repeal presidential term limits in 1986 so as to pave the way for Ronald Reagan to seek a third term.

”The 22nd Amendment is an insult to American voters who are wise and well-informed,” Vander Jagt said at the time.

Reagan himself expressed support for the amendment’s repeal, saying it interfered with the right of the people to “vote for someone as often as they want to do.”

Former President Bill Clinton has frequently spoken out in favor of allowing presidents to serve more than two terms, provided they take some time off before running for a third time.

“I’ve always thought that should be the rule,” Clinton said in November. “I think as a practical matter, you couldn’t apply this to anyone who has already served, but going forward, I personally believe that should be the rule.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2016election; dealbreaker; election2016; joseserrano; newyork; obamaforlife; serrano

1 posted on 01/06/2013 10:12:36 AM PST by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

It’s an odd thing...for around 150 years...Presidents never stayed more than two terms, without any rules in place. Only as we get to the FDR period, does this change. By the mid-1940s...there’s a fairly long view by most voters that some things done in the interest of the Depression...really didn’t do much except extend the depression, and the general fault goes back FDR himself. So rules were enacted to ensure that we didn’t get into that kind of mess again. Personally, I’d like the same limits for Senators and Congressmen. Rather than create full-time, life-time folks for positions...like Lords-for-life, it’s best to keep moving them on at some point.


2 posted on 01/06/2013 10:21:55 AM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

This same Rep has introduced this Bill in each new Congress going back to 2003. I think it was proposed in prior congresses also. It’s not going to happen, at least not in this Congress, IMO.


3 posted on 01/06/2013 10:23:21 AM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Other threads on this Bill if anyone is interested in the comments thereon:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2975467/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2975370/posts


4 posted on 01/06/2013 10:29:50 AM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

0bambi doesn’t need to worry about any silly Constitutional Amendment. He’ll run again and again OR he’ll simply name himself President-for-life, then his wife, his daughters, their children, etc.


5 posted on 01/06/2013 10:33:25 AM PST by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey

Yes, he is learned from his buddies, Chavez & Castro.


6 posted on 01/06/2013 10:35:58 AM PST by entropy12 (The republic is doomed when people figure out they can get free stuff by voting democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
Reminds me of the low-level campaign to remove the natural born citizen clause from the constitution.
7 posted on 01/06/2013 10:38:25 AM PST by Menehune56 ("Let them hate so long as they fear" (Oderint Dum Metuant), Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
”The 22nd Amendment is an insult to American voters who are wise and well-informed,”. . .

Falling on the floor, laughing hysterically.

As a wise, well-informed voter, I NEVER want to see any one president serve more than 2 terms. EVER.

It's the foolish, ill-informed who support eliminating such limits. Like the ones who voted twice for president obamination.

Thank Heaven for the Constitution!

8 posted on 01/06/2013 10:38:29 AM PST by mombonn (God is looking for spiritual fruit, not religious nuts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
there ought to be a rule in congress. introduce a bill and it doesn't get enough votes to pass, you must resign. maybe that will reduce all the wasted time and energy on bull shit
9 posted on 01/06/2013 10:39:48 AM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Meh, will never pass as whoever is NOT in power will make sure of it.


10 posted on 01/06/2013 10:39:58 AM PST by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

LOL....LOL....LOL....LOL....LOL


11 posted on 01/06/2013 10:41:02 AM PST by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

LOL....LOL....LOL....LOL....LOL


12 posted on 01/06/2013 10:41:38 AM PST by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

LOL....LOL....LOL....LOL....LOL


13 posted on 01/06/2013 10:41:45 AM PST by cubreporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Is that the sound of 90 million guns locking and loading?


14 posted on 01/06/2013 10:42:49 AM PST by longfellow (Bill Maher, the 21st hijacker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
...removing the limit on how many terms a president may serve in office.

Replace it with term limits on the House and Senate?

15 posted on 01/06/2013 10:51:33 AM PST by Libloather (The epitome of civility.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mombonn

”The 22nd Amendment is an insult to American voters who are wise and well-informed,”. . .

Falling on the floor, laughing hysterically.


Yeah, these same wise and informed American voters elected a fraud TWICE together with his corrupt cabinet.


16 posted on 01/06/2013 10:52:45 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike ("Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Repeal of the 22nd Amendment shall not possibly come in time to be of any benefit to Bronco Bama, short of totally suspending the Constitution altogether (do not count this possibility out).

NOW, Bronco Bama is looking for a loophole allowing him to unilaterally raise the amount of whatever national debt which has been incurred, under the 14th Amendment, Section 4, but it takes a keen eye indeed to detect this authority in the phrase, “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services is suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” The validity might not be questioned, but the authority to increase it certainly can and should be.

Is this in the same Constitution that Bronco Bama wants to simply declare “invalid”? If suspended, ALL the provisions are equally inoperative, and it is like, well, trying to run the nation’s finances without a formal budget for disbursing the resources of the US Treasury.

Oh, wait. The Senate has not acted on a budget measure since about 2009....


17 posted on 01/06/2013 10:54:02 AM PST by alloysteel (Bronco Bama - the cowboy who whooped up and widened the stampede.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

It takes more than a congressional resolution or even a law to remove the term limit restriction. It takes a constitutional amendment, and and amendment wouldn’t even get a majority in either the House or Senate much less a 2/3’rds vote.


18 posted on 01/06/2013 10:56:55 AM PST by Paleo Conservative (Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not really out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Plus a Constitutional Amendment has to be ratified by 3/4s of the states.


19 posted on 01/06/2013 11:01:35 AM PST by nanetteclaret (Unreconstructed Catholic Texan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice; COUNTrecount
It’s an odd thing...for around 150 years...Presidents never stayed more than two terms, without any rules in place. Only as we get to the FDR period, does this change.

I think he may have gotten the idea from his cousin Teddy. Although Theodore Roosevelt only served the remaining three and a half years of McKinley's second term and was only elected to one addtional term, he ran for President again as the Bull Moose candidate in 1912. Had he been elected in 1912, he would have served almost three terms.

20 posted on 01/06/2013 11:13:23 AM PST by Paleo Conservative (Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not really out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nanetteclaret

Just wondering how many of those 3/4 states wound up voting for Obamalamadingdong.


21 posted on 01/06/2013 11:16:15 AM PST by SkyDancer (Live your life in such a way that the Westboro church will want to picket your funeral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice

The worst thing about FDR and the cult of personality “President-for-Life” bit was that people started thinking he was a semi-divine Emperor of some kind. Sailors on their way to fight on Mainland Japan were terrified because they thought FDR’s death meant we were going to lose the war.


22 posted on 01/06/2013 11:50:16 AM PST by Cyber Liberty (Obama considers the Third World morally superior to the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

We need the same term limits on Congress.


23 posted on 01/06/2013 1:55:04 PM PST by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson