Is the 22nd amendment going to be repealed?
68Another Chavez?
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)
HJ 5 IH
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:
Obama’s coup d’etat is coming in the form of 22nd Amendment repeal.
The president takes a page from the Chavez playbook and makes an end-around for dictator-for-life.
by Michael Naragon
Economic expert Milton Friedman long believed that one of the weaknesses of the American system was that Congressmen were not limited in the number of terms they can serve. With the right constituency and/or control of redistricting, some politicians have managed to stay in office for decades, thereby becoming entrenched in the politics of corruption and quid pro quo that Washington has become. Now, the president may receive the Constitutional right to remain in office just as long.
On January 6, 2009, days before Barack Obama was sworn in as president, amid the pomp and circumstance of his coronation, a resolution was quietly advanced in the House Judiciary Committee. The resolution, HJ Res. 5, reads as follows:
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.”
In essence, what the resolution and a subsequent 28th Amendment would do, if passed, is make it feasible for a president of the United States to remain in office as often as he can win elections.
George Washington set a precedent by remaining in office for two terms. Every president following our Founding Father replicated this tradition.
Only a Democrat, Franklin Roosevelt, in a time of national crisis, dared to presume the American people needed more than eight years of his guidance and rule. Using the crisis, he was elected four times, convincing Americans not to “change horses in the middle of a river.”
Now, the man who would be Roosevelt and Lincoln rolled into a smooth, apologetic package, can seek to use his own crisis, including the parts of his own making, to continue his tenure in the highest office in the land.
Some will say, “You’re nuts. He’ll lose in 2012, much less three terms from now.” To that belief, I counter with some other nuts–specifically, ACORN. Now it has, hopefully, become more clear to you why ACORN has received millions of taxpayer dollars for its operating costs in the stimulus plan advanced by Obama and passed by Congress. Remember, the stimulus bill granting them that money was passed in February, more than a month after HJ Res. 5 had been advanced.
It should also start becoming painfully obvious why ACORN will be involved with the Census in 2010. This “nonpartisan,” now-taxpayer-funded group could/will be key to keeping Democrats, including Obama, in office indefinitely.
The Democratic machine in Minnesota has already managed to reverse the Senate election there in favor of Al Franken. How difficult would it be to do so on a national level? Throw in the potentiality of legalizing millions of illegal immigrants in the next year, and we could all grow old with Barack Obama as our caretaker-president, unless something is done to stem the tide that is washing us onto the desolate beach of Marxist communism, Soviet style.
The members of the House Judiciary Committee are listed below, as is a link to the Library of Congress entry on HJ Res. 5.
Democrats:
- John Conyers, Chairman, Michigan
- Howard Berman, California
- Rick Boucher, Virginia
- Jerrold Nadler, New York
- Bobby Scott, Virginia
- Mel Watt, North Carolina
- Zoe Lofgren, California
- Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas
- Maxine Waters, California
- Bill Delahunt, Massachusetts
- Robert Wexler, Florida
- Steve Cohen, Tennessee
- Hank Johnson, Georgia
- Pedro Pierluisi, Puerto Rico
- Michael Quigley, Illinois
- Luis Gutierrez, Illinois
- Brad Sherman, California
- Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin
- Charlie Gonzalez, Texas
- Anthony Weiner, New York
- Adam Schiff, California
- Linda Sánchez, California
- Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida
- Dan Maffei, New York
Republicans:
- Lamar S. Smith, Ranking Member, Texas
- Jim Sensenbrenner, Wisconsin
- Howard Coble, North Carolina
- Elton Gallegly, California
- Bob Goodlatte, Vice Ranking Member, Virginia
- Dan Lungren, California
- Darrell Issa, California
- Randy Forbes, Virginia
- SteveKing, Iowa
- Trent Franks, Arizona
- Louie Gohmert, Texas
- Jim Jordan, Ohio
- Ted Poe, Texas
- Jason Chaffetz, Utah
- Tom Rooney, Florida
- Gregg Harper, Mississippi
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.J.Res.5:
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Thanks for that good information. Good work.
Bernie that Is way to scary to even ponder . Best to you and keep hubbin my friend
Don't worry Bernie, it will never happen. Americans put up with a lot, but they slow-burn. It is my belief that we will vomit Obama out shortly (sorry to be so graphic but it really sums it all up). Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of this one.
Madame x,
I sure hope you are right. Thanks.













ledefensetech says:
8 months ago
The problem is that any amendment will require 3/4 of the states to ratify the amendment. I don't see that happening, especially in the Western states. The other option they have is to call a Constitutional convention, that's how the 18th amendment was repealed, but if they do that, it could easily backfire. That's why it's only been done once since the Constitution was first written. If they were to call a Convention, they would almost certainly get changes that they didn't anticipate. Only about 1/2 of the country votes in regular elections. In the case of a Convention, the other half would quickly come out of the woodwork to stymie the machinations of the party machine in this country.
Who knows? If a Convention is called it may be the 16th amendment, not the 22nd that is repealed.