Count these guys in as a big "Si Senor" to that commie Hoyer and Nosensenbrenners latest tomfoolery.
Just what we need, a mechanism to continually reelect socialists that rob from the rich and give to the useless in exchange for votes.
Posted on 10/08/2006 11:22:08 AM PDT by janetgreen
Bills introduced in Congress to repeal 8-year restriction of 22nd Amendment
WASHINGTON – One thing is certain about the 2008 presidential election campaign that begins in one year: It won't involve George W. Bush as a candidate.
But bipartisan legislation to repeal the 22nd Amendment restriction of two terms for U.S. presidents could change that certainty for future presidents.
Two of the most passionate congressional advocates of such a move – Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-MD, and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-WI – have teamed up to sponsor a resolution that would represent the first step toward that change in the U.S. political system.
"The time has come to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, and not because of partisan politics," explained Hoyer. "While I am not a supporter of the current President, I feel there are good public policy reasons for a repeal of this amendment. Under the Constitution as altered by the 22nd Amendment, this must be President George W. Bush's last term even if the American people should want him to continue in office. This is an undemocratic result."
Until President Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to his fourth term during World War II, there was no such restriction in American law. A tradition of presidents serving two terms only began with George Washington.
"We do not have to rely on rigid constitutional standards to hold our Presidents accountable," said Hoyer. "Sufficient power resides in the Congress and the Judiciary to protect our country from tyranny."
Hoyer argues the 22nd Amendment "has the effect of removing the president from the accountability to political forces that come to bear during regular elections every four years."
Rep. Howard Berman, D-CA, is another advocate of the move.
"I don't like arbitrary term limits,'' he said. "I think our country was better off because Franklin Delano Roosevelt was able to run for a fourth term. Imposing an arbitrary limit makes no sense.''
Should the resolution pass and be approved by the states, the repeal would not go into effect until after the Bush presidency, making him ineligible for multiple consecutive terms.
The 22nd Amendment states: "Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
"Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states within seven years from the date of its submission to the states by the Congress."
Hoyer's bill is not the only one in the House with the same goal. Rep. Jose Serrano, D-NY, has introduced a similar resolution. Both of the Democrats have been working on repealing the 22nd Amendment since the presidency of Bill Clinton.
Former President Clinton is on record as approving of the repeal of the 22nd Amendment.
If you would like to sound off on this issue, participate in today's WND Poll.
A term limit on Congresscritters would also get us back to the concept of citizen legislators that the Founding Fathers envisioned instead of having the current crop of political whores from both parties who will say and do anything it takes to remain in Congress.
We already have too much in common with Rome, especially our Congress (Roman Senate). Maybe we should slowly back away from repeating history.
If there is a change, make it one term of six years through election by the Senate and let the States appoint their own Senators without popular election.
NO WAY!
Two terms (eight years) is enough for ANYONE.
Two was enough for George Washington.
"There should also be limits on Congress also. 4 - 2 year terms for Congressmen and 2 - 6 year terms for Senators. Far too many or these people lose their way after staying too long"
I totally agree to term limits on Congress and the Senate.
That is what is needed.
The President to a one 6 year term would be best for the country.
Count these guys in as a big "Si Senor" to that commie Hoyer and Nosensenbrenners latest tomfoolery.
Just what we need, a mechanism to continually reelect socialists that rob from the rich and give to the useless in exchange for votes.
President Washington was not term limited. He had character. When he refused to run for a third term, he indicated that he thought two terms were enough for anybody. This established a precedent, which all presidents followed until FDR.
After FDR was elected to a 4th term, and made some serious errors as he was dying, it became evident that Washington's precedent should be more strongly encouraged, thus the 22nd amendment.
"Just like Mexico?"
More like the confederacy. Didn't the confederacy want only one term for presidents, the length being six years?
A rule I would like to see is that no relative (or wife) of current or past politicians be allowed to run, just ordinary Americans with new ideas. We've had enough monarchy to last several lifetimes.
"We already have too much in common with Rome, especially our Congress (Roman Senate). Maybe we should slowly back away from repeating history."
The Roman republic lasted 500 years. Their failure was in letting two men to become too powerful.
NOOOOOOOOOOooooooooo!
2 terms is bad enough.
Good post, DG!
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 24
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 17, 2005
Mr. HOYER (for himself, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SABO, and Mr. PALLONE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
`Article --
`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed.'.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.J.RES.24.IH:
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.J.RES.24.IH:
Fidel and Hugo, the dynamic duo. Don't forgot Vicente and his many fawning sycophants in Washington, including our president.
No!
NO!!
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.