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.
view all titles (1)All Bill Titles
- Official: 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. as introduced.
This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

U.S. Congress - H.J.Res.15 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-se...




Sort By
Comments Feed
Is Clinton running again?
NO! NO! NO! Do NOT remove the term limit!
I’e a better idea – why don’t we just scrap congress altogether, elect a benevolent king and then his blue-blooded family can inherit the throne forever and ever? Any crimes, misdemeanors, civil suits can be decided by the king’s favorite advisor too, why waste money on the court system? Let’s start by making Jose Serrano our first king of the United States of America!
Spam Comment
There was no term limits until 1951, and since then a bill to repeal it has been introduced in every congress, by both parties, under the presidency of both parties.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/termlimits.asp
How is this possible for the 113th Congress to allow this most preposterous proposal to repeal the 22nd Amendment. Are they that ignorant or should be force them to take a class in US Government and learn what it is the Founding Fathers wanted in the creation of the Federal Government. The one thing they specifically did not want is a KING or permanent leader, and certainly NOT a Dictator.
Well you figure the legislation has been proposed by a liberal representative in the House whose party is currently the minority party. The bill will die soon.
Serrano’s not the only one who’s proposed such legislation:
There was no term limits until 1951, and since then a bill to repeal it has been introduced in every congress, by both parties, under the presidency of both parties.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/termlimits.asp
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
You mention the founding fathers as though they thought of this. In fact, it wasn’t put into law until 1951. Before that point there were a total of two presidents who served more than two terms. Those would be George Washington and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
To give a president unlimited terms doesn’t make someone a dictator, nor a king. It in fact, allows a president to realize everything in which he/she has wished to do with their presidency. Knowing that the majority voted for them and that they are supported in doing so.
Any Constitutionalist who says that we should have term limits on presidents isn’t really a Constitutionalist. Because there is no law in the constitution; only an amendment. And that amendment was made because of how old presidents get in office. The country couldn’t stand to let anyone rule for a long period of time.
Explain the future then. I would like to know, when people live 120 years. Do we still need Term Limits?
Look at what happened in the 2012 Presidential Election with all the voter fraud going on to ensure that Obama would win. Wouldn’t you think that any subsequent elections would be done the same way? Yes, he will cheat and lie to stay in office.
Yes, our founding Fathers were men of great vision but they couldn’t be expected to plan for everything and I think they did a wonderful job in the Constitution.
Yes, Amendments to the Constitution ARE LAW, because they are int he US Constitution. Your statement is completely stupid. So you are saying that the fir 10 Amendments known as the “Bill of Rights” are NOT law. Total garbarge are you even paying attention to what you are even saying? I don’t think so. Amendments process of the Constitution is to enter new laws that are the “Supreme Law of the Land”.
Spam Comment
We absolutely cannot chip away at our constitution piece by piece. Each crack in our liberty makes room for tyranny to seep in. Any elected official who supports this bill is in violation of their oath of office.
“Any elected official who supports this bill is in violation of their oath of office.”
First and foremost, a politician is a servant of the people not the constitution. If the people say, “Abolish the Constitution!” Then that is what the politician is supposed to do. Obviously, people who respond the way you do are a little butt hurt about people expressing their feelings.
Trust me, when I say that the age of tyranny is over for many. It isn’t going to come “seeping” back in. Because it has no floor on which to stand. We have something called YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter. Those do the revolutions for us nowadays and no modern day monarchy can stand with those available. Except for those that oppress it.
Your kind make me laugh out loud sometimes. You all sound alike and although it is funny, it is also touching. It makes me realize that for some hope is all but lost. Perhaps when Socialism has truely landed in America. You will embrace and love it. Damn Teabaggers.
This can not be allowed to happen and JOSE SERRANO should be sent home for even thinking of such a proposal. He needs to be replaced with someone with some common sense.
Spam Comment
Whoa, I thought this was a joke at first! Then I realized, this man is serious…
This doesn’t really surprise me,Obama wants to be a dictator anyway.The representatives for my state (MS) better not vote for this!!
Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution? All civil magistrates are bound by oath to abide by the U.S. Constitution, and nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is any authority given for these United States to be subject to and bound by any earthly piece of paper that abrogates or is alien to the Constitution of the United States.
Every other year since 1997. We can only hope it never succeeds, but he’s in for his 13th term!
This is a waste of time and would never happen.
The 22nd amendment to the constitution is one of the safe-guards to prevent the tyranny of the majority. It should remain in place.
Perhaps one term should be considered , that way we would get an honest effort to do the job.
I think people are overreacting to this. Clearly, it has no chance of passing Congress. I’m not sure what the intentions of the Congressman are or why he proposes it, but it’s nothing to get worked up about. This is just part of the typical routine of submitting outlandish bills and resolutions at the start of a term.
How is it “Clearly” of not chance in passing Congress? Where is your proof of this statement? If it is too outrageous then why submit it to committee?
Spam Comment
Yeah right, what a good way to get a tyrannanical despot in place. Idiotic idea.
A better idea would be give each one 6 year term, then after they finish their term, imprison them for life! MOLON LABE