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

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`The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.'.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 previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last
To: sal002
Kinda hard to say he is un-American when he suffered bodily harm to slow the advance of Communism in Southeast Asia.

Only to support its advance in the US.

61 posted on 05/10/2003 7:24:02 AM PDT by AlGone2001 (If liberals must lie to advance their agenda, why is liberalism good for me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
NO.
They RAN the dead candidate and the dead candidate won the election!

That is what necessitated the special election for Ed Case.
62 posted on 05/10/2003 7:28:35 AM PDT by bonesmccoy (Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: steplock
One small point here ... Tom DeLay, Republican House Majority Leader has pushed this for years. I have heard him say it 5 or 6 times myself. It is because he is against term limits for congressmen and is making some kind of stupid point.
63 posted on 05/10/2003 7:28:54 AM PDT by HoustonCurmudgeon (PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steplock
Seems to me that they have hopes of running the liar-in-chief against President Bush...
64 posted on 05/10/2003 7:31:26 AM PDT by MWS (Errare humanum est, in errore perservare stultum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steplock
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.

Bill Clinton vs GWB in 2004?

65 posted on 05/10/2003 7:34:05 AM PDT by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sal002
Has he openly advocated for the violent overthrow of the US government?

No, but in political speak, he said the US needed a "regime change", like the one recently inflcted on Saddam Hussein. He is attempting to create the impression that President Bush is a totalitarian, which I totally detest.

If he will openly provide opposition to what need to be done to provide a representative republic in Iraq, what would he do here?

One thing about democrats: they never have the guts to say what they really mean. They don't even have the guts to use the term liberal to define themselves. That's enough for me to have major issues with him. Kerry may have been a hero in VietNam, but like all other democrats on the homefront, he is a coward.

66 posted on 05/10/2003 7:34:53 AM PDT by AlGone2001 (If liberals must lie to advance their agenda, why is liberalism good for me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
Oh, I see now.
67 posted on 05/10/2003 7:42:43 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: steplock
This bill has been introduced before. It was a hot item when Clinton served as, uh, well, Chief eXXXecutive.

It's a piece of legislation that will go nowhere.

When bills are introduced, they go to committee. After they are out of committee we'll take action.
68 posted on 05/10/2003 7:47:07 AM PDT by gortklattu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
The measure was passed after FDR's death to keep another president from keeping office for a lifetime. It was intended as a dynasty stopper, two terms is quite enough for one President. For any president to run again in the future after he has served two terms is a bad thing, indeed.
69 posted on 05/10/2003 7:58:01 AM PDT by wingnuts'nbolts (T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wingnuts'nbolts
yes i agree.
70 posted on 05/10/2003 8:02:03 AM PDT by bonesmccoy (Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: sal002
Was it not Kerry in a grand passion who threw his purple heart and whatever other medals he was awarded over the fence onto the WH lawn in total contempt and antiwar frenzi only to find that now he is touting those same medals and claims he threw away someone else's. Stand up guy!

I reccommend looking up Backhoe's links, looks of facts.
71 posted on 05/10/2003 8:05:04 AM PDT by wingnuts'nbolts (T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
The GOP should be more upset because the measure was passed to stop FDR, but only affected GOP presidents since.

Clinton was the first DemocRAT president affected by it.

72 posted on 05/11/2003 7:26:00 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy; philman_36
NO. They RAN the dead candidate and the dead candidate won the election!

That is what necessitated the special election for Ed Case.

Even worse they ran two (expensive) special elections. One to fill her seat for the remainder of the 107th Congress and another to fill her seat in the 108th Congress. That was a really stupid waste of taxpayer money considering hardly any business was conducted after the first special election.

73 posted on 05/11/2003 7:32:57 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth; Sonny M
The left wing fascists are the ones who want this change because they want to overwhelm and rule forever.

I really doubt it would pass with a 2/3rds majority in both the House and Senate and then get 3/4ths of the states to ratify. It wouldn't even be close.

74 posted on 05/11/2003 7:36:23 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RonF
'Unbelievable. The bent one is now trying to change our Constitution to suit his own needs.'

Why not? It's a free country, or at least it's supposed to be. Consider the fact that the term limit was not originally a part of the Constitution, and that the 22nd Amendment was passed due to great effort by the Republicans because of FDR's tenure in the office.

Not that I want to see Clinton as President again. and I favor retaining the 2-term limitation. But it's kind of hypocritical to condemn partisan politicing when it's object is to undo the result of partisan politicing that was itself undertaken to change the Constitution to meet a given party's needs in the first place.

Interesting how the 22nd amendment specifically did not apply to the president currently holding office when it was adopted (Truman). I bet Clinton would oppose any restricition applying repeal of the 22nd amendment only to future presidents who had not been elected prior to its repeal.

75 posted on 05/11/2003 7:44:20 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
Whatever. What Clinton does or does not do interests me little.
76 posted on 05/12/2003 6:15:32 AM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: TexanToTheCore; ALOHA RONNIE
Not me..Its' the Clintons, maybe the NYpol is trying to warn Shrillarys' DNC "Don't Go There"..One can hope, can't we?
77 posted on 05/12/2003 7:19:47 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Just because your paranoid,doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 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.

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