Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

No term limits for President?.....H. J. RES. 5

page: 1
32
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+3 more 
posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   
How many people have heard about this?
Quietly submitted on January 6, 2009 by Rep José Serrano D-NY


111th CONGRESS 1st Session H. J. RES. 5 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 6, 2009 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for ratification: `Article-- `The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.'.


Library of Congress

[edit on 11-3-2009 by GuyverUnit I]




posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
BOOOOOOO....We are so doomed. I will miss the way things were. Become a Texan Quick people. Chuck Norris for President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[edit on 10-3-2009 by timewalker]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
I don't really get why anyone would want to change the term limits. By the 8th year, I'm sure a president is hating his job.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Leave it to the democrats to try something like that.

just be glad that it would have to be ratified by the states to become law.

And with the number of states claiming state sovereignty it is unlikely to happen.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Dude at least they are being honest ...

I mean look on both sides of the American Flag - on the House Floor.
check out those symbols... Fasci ... therefore Fascist Regime and its been there a while ... so this is all planned and they could do anything to anybody for any reason already ... so, why all this honesty ... really -
911 was a inside job... yea, cuz it damn sure didnt do what your govt said happen, I graduated 7 th grade you know....

This truth stuff may have a double edge ... but until further notice --- I took an oath to the Constitution ... I dont care what these Fascist want or think about America ... they are toast ... next ...



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


that would be 2/3rds majority rule .... ok, check out Bill Benson and the 16th Ammendment that never was ratified..... ???? and Joe Bannister for some IRS investigating - and Aaron Russo Sandy Cohn IRS is also good...



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Is Obama turning into H. Chavez, and we suffer the same fate as Venezuela?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by BornPatriot
 


Well Obama really is going to bring change. It's sad how this isn't even surprising. Grab a hold to your loved ones and your protection it's about to hit the fan.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   
So apparently the guy who wrote this has been trying to ram it through for 7 sessions of Congress.

en.wikipedia.org...


In each of 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009, Serrano introduced a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd Amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as president. Each resolution, with the exception of the current one, died without ever getting past the committee.


I don't like him.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
what kind of people would keep electing someone who would even propose something like this? Are they not paying attention or do they just really want a socialist/communist America?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by spec_ops_wannabe en.wikipedia.org...

... Each resolution, with the exception of the current one, died without ever getting past the committee.

What I can't figure out is what is different about this current one that it would finnaly get past committee?..............



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   
This really scares me, all signs point to a dictatorship in America. We will miss you lady liberty.

-E-



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Hey "Guyver Unit I", I find it absolutely amazing that even though I heard about this in January, I was JUST discussing the issue with an acquaintance today, and here you go with a Thread on the same subject.

The only comfort that I find in such a ludicrous proposition for "King Obama, Lord Reid, and Mistress Pelosi", is that 3/4 of the States will NEVER pass such an Amendment.

The one cause which unites ALL Americans, both Liberal and Conservative, is the value we place upon our Freedoms and Democracy.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I agree with sadisticwoman especially in the case of what the previous administration left for Obama.... why on earth would he or anybody else want to stay longer than 8years??


In anycase these bills are beyond themselves. Every month or so theres a new wacko bill being put forward by various politicians.... last month was the "get rid of the IRS" bill.... prior to that was "state independence" bill... heck just recently there was rumor of the "fairness docterine" however these all really go nowhere.... they usually dont get far beyond notice by the underground lurkers.... or like us conspiracy internet folk


Yes we should recognize these bills for what they are but people jump the gun and start preaching dooms day everytime these wacko bills are put forward... folks should start recognizing there is a cycle of "wacko bills" among the serious ones that pose no real influence.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
Hey "Guyver Unit I", I find it absolutely amazing that even though I heard about this in January, I was JUST discussing the issue with an acquaintance today, and here you go with a Thread on the same subject.

The only comfort that I find in such a ludicrous proposition for "King Obama, Lord Reid, and Mistress Pelosi", is that 3/4 of the States will NEVER pass such an Amendment.

The one cause which unites ALL Americans, both Liberal and Conservative, is the value we place upon our Freedoms and Democracy.


We're a republic not a democracy.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by GuyverUnit I
 


You realize this might be a good thing? You can harass your Congress to instigate a "vote of no confidence" whenever you don't really like your President and so the best leader would always be represented throughout time. But doesn't that go against the Constitution, in that the powers of the legislative branch usurp that of the executive? I'm not American, so I wouldn't know.

One of the main reasons for the fixed terms is that the mob mentality of the general population might not be an accurate predictor of what the country needs. Then again, if Americans had the chance to depose Bush through a "vote of no confidence" then that might have been perceived as a good choice. Then again, no one really knows and Bush probably did a lot to help the security of the nation that many people will just never possibly understand. If people are forced to put great thought into a vote every four years it's probably likely you get the best candidate. Knowing that there is a set limit to the duration of a President's office, puts him in a position to plan and organize his goal in an efficient manner. Then again, the power that being a sole ruler for two definite terms might get to their heads. Conversely, you have a government that doesn't accomplish anything particularly useful.

Fact is, removal of the term limit would essentially destroy the two-party system that America has at the moment. Many, many different parties would form and they would become much more viable in the face of this change. Canada, with a population of 30 million, usually has four major contenders in Parliament each election. Britain, with double Canada's population, has approximately 10-12 parties. Following that, a Parliamentary style government in the U.S. would probably need somewhere between 20-30 different parties to remain viable. Otherwise, having only two parties in a system where the President could be deposed at any moment would result in a very fractious and volatile political system. If one party does something stupid, it would only be a matter of weeks until an entire new administration would be introduced. Where's the unity in that? America, as a global political leader, needs to be maintain a greater degree of solidity than the rest of us, in Canada, for example.

Read this article from TIME Magazine for another perspective.
www.time.com...

I might have totally misunderstood this, but if there is no term limit, and no ability to pass a "vote of no confidence" in Congress, then how would new Presidents be elected? Does Congress call for elections whenever it wants? I think that's what happened during the early history of America at least...



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:19 AM
link   
I thought this bill only dealt with rewording the 22nd amendment, by striking the word "consecutive term" and inserting "2 terms in a lifetime." Apparently, this is a different bill.

Anyhow, I guess it takes 3/4 of the states to enact it. WHO the hell do these people think they are overturning amendments and why the hell isn't the media saying anything.

[edit on 11-3-2009 by ExPostFacto]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Okay, so I'm not new.. but no veteran.. (finally had to register)

Seriously though, are you surprised? I mean, sh1t, I was expecting this since Bush II came in. Hasn't this been painted so perfectly yet?

Hm, how strange? A closely related group of people keep popping into powerful positions? Isn't it about time that they changed a few of the "rules" to make it easier for one another?

If I had been in that position (wanting to keep total control and what not) I would have manipulated every system, corrupt or not, to maintain the best outcome of my "family".

Maybe too many beers but just my opinion.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Woops. Guess I was late.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   
we dont have to worry about the people re-electing a president for more than eight years, we usually grow tired of them. what we have to worry about is a corupt congress voting for him and rigged election machines. its not hard to rig elections inorder to win elections, especially when you vote on a electronic apparatus. if they can do it for life we are in serious trouble. look at N. Korea. they have a vote but the worst possible canidate always wins. same with Iran and the ayatolas.





new topics

top topics



 
32
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join