I COULD go back to using:
though... ;)
Posted on 01/06/2013 10:04:00 AM PST by righttackle44
H.J.RES.15 -- Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual... (Introduced in House - IH)
HJ 15 IH
113th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 15
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 4, 2013
Mr. SERRANO 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 twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.
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`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.'.
You guys are awesome with your well-informed responses. Hewitt calls Freepers the Coast Watchers. With good reason.
It is nice for Democrats to expose their real agenda, but it ain’t happening in the next four years.
No, the birthers are too busy reading and posting on dubious blogs about things they’ve read on other dubious blogs that swear up and down that the BC is fake based on GIFS of fake BC that they themselves can be just as fake, which were found on yet another dubious blog.
Then they will make up their own definition of natural born citizen and ignore and decry supreme court decisions that state otherwise. They’ll talk about this on dubious blogs and then another dubious blog will crop up and state that the election can be nullified even though there is no such mechanism in the U.S Constitution — which apparently only applies if you agree with it, if not than it doesn’t count.
All this of course accompanied by heart rendering hand wringing on yet more dubious blogs.
I think to start the timer, it has to be approved by a super majority.
I'd rather draw a warm bath, pour me a nice glass of wine, light a candle, slip in to the tub....then slit my freakin wrist!
Ok, so for those of you who take such stuff literally...I'm joking.
Why don’t the progressives adopt Professer Louis Michael Seidman’s position on the Constitution instead of attempting to stick with an “outmoded written document” which is too hard to change? Rome moved from being a corrupt Republic to an Empire rather easily.
This has no chance of going anywhere and is purely symbolic, but what an ugly symbolism it is! I think what you will actually see is Michelle Obama running in 2016. There’s no law against that, she has as much experience as Hillary did when the left was touting her (in other words, she was married to a president), and the press loves her.
But the statement Serrano is trying to make is that Obama and his ilk should be our royal family forever, and that Serrano is hoping for a pat on the head from him. When he gets back from his latest fabulous vacation, that is.
What we really need is a bill to limit terms of House and Senate members.
A Congress with an 8% approval rating gets a 92% re-election rate.
Fits the definition of insanity.
Yes, and we really appreciate your support.
Yep, saw this one coming like a drag queen on a parade float.
I think there would be more votes for sending Obama directly to jail ,do not pass go and not collecting anymore vacations
Libs were talking the same talk during Slick Willys second term and that went nowhere.
*************
Rep Serrano proposed this same bill starting back in 1997 during the Clinton Presidency and in each new Congress during the Bush years. Rep. Hoyer proposed another bill during the last three Congressional sessions in Clinton’s presidency and the first three Congressional sessions in President Bush’s presidency. Others both Democrats and Republicans have made proposals over the years.
This doesn’t get out of committee and won’t this time, imo. I’d prefer to see an amendment proposed to limit terms for the Congress rather than abolishing the 22nd Amendment. jmo.
Article. V (Constitution)The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths (emphases added) thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Note that regardless that Congress can propose amendments to the Constitution, only a 3/4 majority of states, not Congress, can acually ratify a proposed amendment. And given the way that Obama has divided the country, I don't see the Constitution being amended by 2016 for any reason; probably a vote-getting stunt for Mr. Serrano, Mr. Serrano possibly betting that his constituents don't know anything about Article V.
Also note that Article V is arguably the best kept secret of the unconstitutionally big federal government, Article V showing that the states, not the federal government, uniquely controls what the Constitution says, the states therefore having absolute control of the federal government (shhh!). So I don't think that corrupt Congress really wants voters to know more about Article V than they have to.
The bottom line problem concerning why everybody's so interested in federal elections of any kind is the following. As a consequence of widespread ignorance of the constitutionally limited powers of the federal government, voters don't understand that most of the federal government's powers are actually 10th Amendment protected state powers which corrupt presidents and corrupt Congresses have wrongly usurped from the states.
Also note that Article V is arguably the best kept secret of the unconstitutionally big federal government, Article V showing that the states, not the federal government, uniquely controls what the Constitution says, the states therefore having absolute control of the federal government (shhh!). So I don't think that corrupt Congress really wants voters to know more about Article V than they have to.
Many of us who share this forum keep a copy of the Constitution on his/her person at all times -- it's another form of "concealed carry." :)
You're right, though: the death of local newspapers and radio/TV stations and the growing dominance of national news media contribute to the news message becoming more homogenized. It's an effort for a citizen, exhausted after a long day of work and family and other responsibilities, to sit down and self-educate about current issues. As a result, people aren't aware of the Constitution's firewalls and watertight doors which prevent tyranny from seeping out. The state-controlled media will begin to portray the Constitutionally-aware citizens as a threat.
The bottom line problem concerning why everybody's so interested in federal elections of any kind is the following. As a consequence of widespread ignorance of the constitutionally limited powers of the federal government, voters don't understand that most of the federal government's powers are actually 10th Amendment protected state powers which corrupt presidents and corrupt Congresses have wrongly usurped from the states.
The push is to nationalize everything.
I’ll go along with that
The push is by Constitution-ignoring minority factions who are taking advantange of widespread voter ignorance of the Constitution.
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.