Skip to comments.Bill Introduced to Change Term Limits for President (H.J. Res. 15)
Posted on 07/08/2013 9:28:53 AM PDT by kimtom
While the country was discussing the Fiscal Cliff, guns, and Hurricane Sandy, a new bill was introduced in Congress on Friday.
Representative Jose Serrano (D-NY15) put forth a bill, now called H.J. Res. 15″, that proposes 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.
According to GovTrack, it was then [r]eferred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Further, [t]his resolution was assigned to a congressional committee on January 4, 2013, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate .....
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Doesn’t this happen every election cycle?
I have a better idea. Leave that one alone and add term limits to the Senate and the House.
Yep, this guy’s been doing this for years, even back in the W era.
Yes, I think the same rep introduces this every year. It is not going anywhere.
Better idea. Repeal the 17th Amendment, which would return power to the states making the pResident’s term irrelevant.
Leave the Constitution ALONE!
This won’t get a 2/3 vote in either house. It’s dead.
Congressional term limits.
2 terms of 2 years each. 1 6 year senate term.
No lifelong benefits or retirement pay. Do your job and go home.
How about limiting POTUS to one six-year term and spare us these gawdaful re-elect campaigns (and the tendency to manage one’s entire first term towards winning them?)
Heck no! Not until we purge all means of voter fraud.
Can’t we just repeal the NY15th? a gem of a place, a true gem.
Los Zetas (Zetas, Zs) is a powerful and violent criminal syndicate in Mexico, and is considered by the U.S. government to be the “most technologically advanced, sophisticated, and dangerous cartel operating in Mexico.” The origins of Los Zetas date back to 1999, when commandos of the Mexican Army’s elite forces deserted their ranks and decided to work as the armed wing of the Gulf Cartel, a powerful drug trafficking organization. In February 2010, Los Zetas broke away from their former employer and formed their own criminal organization.
Los Zetas are well armed and equipped, and unlike other traditional criminal organizations in Mexico, drug trafficking makes up at least 50% of their revenue, while a large portion of the income comes from other activities directed against both rival drug cartels and civilians; their brutal tactics, which include beheadings, torture and indiscriminate slaughter, show that they often prefer brutality over bribery. Los Zetas are also Mexico’s largest drug cartel in terms of geographical presence, overtaking its rivals, the Sinaloa Cartel. Los Zetas also operate through protection rackets, assassinations, extortion, kidnappings, and other criminal activities. The organization is based in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, directly across the border from Laredo, Texas.
9.^ a b c Stastna, Kazi (28 Auguste 2011). “The cartels behind Mexico’s drug war”. CBS News. Retrieved 14 May 2012.
10.^ a b “Weekend shootouts in northeastern Mexico kill at least 9”. CNN News. Retrieved 9 December 2011.
11.^ a b “El origen de ‘Los Zetas’: brazo armado del cártel del Golfo”. CNN México. 05 de julio del 2011.
12.^ “Zetas Now Mexico’s Biggest Cartel, Report Says”. Fox News. 26 January 2012. Retrieved 15 May 2012.
13.^ McCAUL, MICHAEL T. “A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border”. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY. Retrieved 12 October 2011.
14.^ “Mexican Soldiers Becoming Drug Cartel Hit Men”. NewsMax. 21 June 2005.
15.^ “Dissecting a Mexican Cartel Bombing in Monterrey”. Stratfor. Retrieved 8 December 2011.
OOOps! wrong thread!!!
Unless corrupt lawmakers have a scheme to trash the Constitution's Article V, all talk of new amendments to the Constitution is PC hot air imo. This is because the corrupt federal government cannot afford for low-information voters to find out that only the states, not the federal government, have the power to ratify proposed amendments to the Constitution.
After all, once Constitution-ignorant voters find out that the states have absolute control over what the Constitution says, then they will catch on to the idea that the states have absolute control over the federal government, not vice-versa as is popularly and wrongly thought. And if such knowledge became widespread it would throw a monkey wrench into the Progressive Movement agenda to unconstitutionally centralize government power in DC.
Note that govTrack.us's prognosis of this proposal going anywhere is 0%.
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.
I’ve been saying this very thing all my adult life but no one listens to me.
The problem we face is bureaucratic despotism. Through term limits on elected representatives we'd just be empowering the bureaucrats at the expense of our own representation. The Dems have already proven that term limits matter little when you control the bureaucracy, look at California. Effectively the government has been permanently ceded an disproportionate stake in it's own guidance.
What will really make a difference is limits on the lifetime of laws and regulations, and a requirement that laws and regulations be regularly put to the vote for continued existence. Similarly effective would be ineligibility of public (elected or appointed) office for government workers and vice versa. The target is breaking the cycle of government empowerment.
Another thing is to put an end to foreign meddling in our government affairs. Lobbyists, campaign support, etc. Doesn't matter how benign we think it is, state or federal, it's all about suborning the legitimacy of the government for foreign interests. I would go so far as to say anyone who decides to "go government" must be officially held to a higher standard, not a lower standard (so no evading speeding tickets or immunity from insider trading laws). You want your private life? Resign and it's all yours after a suitable waiting period.
I don't think it would hurt to have a larger house of representatives - that way we'd have more accountable people to do the work of overseeing the government to offset the vast body of unelected, unaccountable people currently doing the job. We should probably limit congressional staff too so only elected representatives are doing the job they applied for. No fair putting a figurehead in the legislature and supporting them with a taxpayer funded staff. In fact, States should probably be responsible for supporting their own congressional delegations.
Some of what I've suggested should also apply to state and local governments.
see other post...similar subject
Yeah! Four years in Congress and four years in JAIL!
I second .....
And make them true public servants - no pay.
Or put them on straight commission, they get to keep a tiny percentage of whatever they cut out of the budget. Then put CSPAN on pay per view, folks would pay to watch that circus.
Oh, and for healthcare they get to sign up for Obummercare.
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.