Skip to comments.
H. J. RES. 11 Repeal Amendment 22 U.S. Constitution
Thomas.Loc.Gov ^
| Rep. Jos, E. Serrano (D-NY)
Posted on 05/07/2003 9:30:27 PM PDT by steplock
Go to: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c108query.html and enter "H.J.Res. 11" in the search box.
I haven't seen this before, and a search here found NOTHING! According to THOMAS, it is still in committee - so it isn't dead yet ???!!!
Rep. Jos, E. Serrano (D-NY), Ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary of the exclusive and powerful House Appropriations Committee, represents the Sixteenth Congressional District in the Bronx. This year, Serrano, who also serves in the influential House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, celebrates his 28th year in the public service. Serrano has been in Congress for seven terms.
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)
HJRES 11 IH
108th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 11 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 7, 2003 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`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: amendment; constitution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
1
posted on
05/07/2003 9:30:27 PM PDT
by
steplock
To: steplock
A Democrat from New York eh? Boy, somebody has really taken control of people up there. Funky legislation coming through that could only help one guy I know of.
2
posted on
05/07/2003 9:32:16 PM PDT
by
Arkinsaw
To: steplock
It won't go anywhere, and I oppose it anyway.
To: steplock
Don't get your panties in a wad over this proposed repeal of the 22nd Amendment. It ain't going nowhere. Over the centuries, more than 10,000 proposed amendments have been dropped in the congressional hopper. Only 53 of them have passed even ONE House of Congress. Only 27 have wound up ratified and part of the Constitution.
In fact, various proposals about the election and term of US Presidents has been the most popular subject. More than 1,000 have been introduced on that one subject. Obviously, none of those has passed Congress, much less been ratified. So, chill on this subject.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column, now up on UPI and FR, "All-American Arrogance"
Latest article, now up on UPI and FR, "The Iraqi Constitution"
4
posted on
05/07/2003 9:46:10 PM PDT
by
Congressman Billybob
("Saddam has left the building. Heck, the building has left the building.")
To: Arkinsaw
Did somebody tell this guy, that the President is George W. Bush, I know he's thinking billy boy (I think his wife would shoot him first though), but he's got to realize that if George gets a second term, this would all but guarantee him to keep running untill his own leisure.
5
posted on
05/07/2003 9:47:41 PM PDT
by
Sonny M
("oderint dum metuant".)
To: Sonny M
Did somebody tell this guy, that the President is George W. Bush, I know he's thinking billy boy (I think his wife would shoot him first though), but he's got to realize that if George gets a second term, this would all but guarantee him to keep running untill his own leisure.
The one this is designed for is not known for his underconfidence. But you are right about the wife thing though.
6
posted on
05/07/2003 9:51:23 PM PDT
by
Arkinsaw
To: Congressman Billybob
So, chill on this subject.
Everyone knows that its not going anywhere. But it IS interesting as an indicator of how far up the hindquarters politicians in New York are. Give those two another 4 or 5 years up there the place will be named for them.
I am glad they are New Yorkers now.
7
posted on
05/07/2003 9:54:03 PM PDT
by
Arkinsaw
To: steplock
Unbelievable. The bent one is now trying to change our Constitution to suit his own needs.
To: steplock; Joy Angela; conservogirl
...LARRY NICHOLS and US have been predicting for years that HILLARY RODHAM and BILL CLINTON would next attack:
The Electoral College
The 22nd Amendment
as their Friend HO CHI MINH smiles broadly at them from his cold, cold Heart.
9
posted on
05/07/2003 10:00:40 PM PDT
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
To: ALOHA RONNIE
I have never seen such arrogance. This leaves me speechless.
To: steplock
There are a pair of really stupid amendments I'd like to see repealed, but the 22nd isn't among them.
(Actually, it was a triplet of really stupid amendments, but one of them has already been repealed...)
11
posted on
05/07/2003 10:04:43 PM PDT
by
jdege
To: steplock
It's hilarious.
Think about it.
The Rats are showing signs of frustration.
The only Presidents ever affected by the two term rule were GOP, with the exception of Bill Clinton.
The measure affected Ike, would have affected Nixon, disqualified Reagan, and will apply to Bush 43.
JFK, LBJ, and Carter failed to win a second electoral victory.
12
posted on
05/07/2003 10:04:55 PM PDT
by
bonesmccoy
(Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
To: Sonny M
I hope if anything like this passes it would exclude previously and currently serving Presidents. Clinton would be a horror. But Bush? Seriously, the guy will be fine for 8 years, but we have much better people in our party who can fill the post better. They need a chance.
13
posted on
05/07/2003 10:05:19 PM PDT
by
sal002
To: bonesmccoy
"JFK, LBJ, and Carter failed to win a second electoral victory."
Carter was the only one that ran for a second term.
14
posted on
05/07/2003 10:06:09 PM PDT
by
sal002
To: TexanToTheCore
Long, long ago...
Anti-U.S.
HO CHI MINH
HILLARY RODHAM
BILL CLINTON
WALTER CRONKITE
JOHN KERRY
left me absolutely speechless.
STILL DO.
15
posted on
05/07/2003 10:13:19 PM PDT
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
To: ALOHA RONNIE
Maybe I am new here...I understand all but "John Kerry". I mean, yes, he is dead wrong on almost every policy he supports - but didn't he get injured fighting in Vietnam? Kinda hard to say he is un-American when he suffered bodily harm to slow the advance of Communism in Southeast Asia.
16
posted on
05/07/2003 10:15:51 PM PDT
by
sal002
To: TexanToTheCore
17
posted on
05/07/2003 10:16:56 PM PDT
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
To: steplock
I haven't seen this before, and a search here found NOTHING! According to THOMAS, it is still in committee - so it isn't dead yet ???!!!Most bills are killed precisely by sending them to committee. They check in, but they don't check out.
Ignore this. Someone files a bill like this (and a zillion others trying to repeal practically everything else under the sun), and they're quickly dispensed with and forgotten about forever.
18
posted on
05/07/2003 10:18:31 PM PDT
by
Timesink
To: sal002
Doesn't matter.
LBJ would have been running for a second term, but chose not to run because he would have lost his hat.
The point is that the rats are upset.
The GOP should be more upset because the measure was passed to stop FDR, but only affected GOP presidents since.
19
posted on
05/07/2003 10:24:21 PM PDT
by
bonesmccoy
(Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
To: sal002
...JOHN KERRY came back from the Vietnam War to lead Anti-U.S./War Protestors in the 1960's and 1970's just as verilant as those you see today.
...When JOHN KERRY spoke at the Veterans Day Ceremony at the Vietnam Wall last year some informed Vietnam Veterans turned their back on him just like they did when Anti-U.S./War Protestor BILL CLINTON did when he was President.
Anti-U.S. during the Vietnam War =
Anti-U.S. now.
20
posted on
05/07/2003 10:24:25 PM PDT
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson