This post is somewhat of a repeat of one of my prior posts, which I mistakenly titled: "Bill Clinton and HR17". It is House Joint Resolution 17, or, H.J.R. 17 that I meant to refer to. (This seems appropriate in light of the excellent work Diane has done today with the Presidential Executive Orders.) You'll find the H.J.R. 17 text at:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query

For those of you who have not read this resolution, it was introduced by Democrat Rep Serrano and Rebublican Rep Shays. It is apparently in the House Judiciary Committee for review. It overturns the 22nd Article of the U.S. Constitution which places term limits on the Office of the President of the United States. (Please read the resolution for full details.)

I emailed both Congressmen. My question to both of the Congressmen was simple: "What is the underlying purpose for this Joint Resolution?" A robot email reply was immediate from Rep Shays.

BEGINNING OF CONGRESSMAN SHAY'S EMAIL RESPONSE:

Thank you for your E-mail. The numerous E-mails, calls and letters we receive serve as a wonderful tool and information source for me. While I welcome all this communication, due to the large volume of messages we are receiving, my first priority is to respond to residents of Connecticut's Fourth Congressional District whose E-mail message includes a postal address. If you have not included your address and are from Connecticut, please resend your original message and address so we may respond to your concerns by postal mail. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we work to be as responsive as possible to your concerns.

END OF CONGRESSMAN SHAY'S EMAIL.

Do we have a Yourdanite from Connecticut?

It's been seven days and no response from Serrano. I'm not really surprised.

Okay, you guys. Just what the Hell is the reason for this Resolution? As I said before, it might just give the conspiracy buffs something to connect with those Presidential Executive Orders that Diane took so much care to document.

Keep the faith.

BW

-- Bob Walton (waltonb@kdsi.net), February 21, 1999

Answers

Excuse. You may not be able to use the above thread:

Try:

http://thomas.loc.gov/ and enter "H.J.R. 17" for a search.

BW

-- Bob Walton (waltonb@kdsi.net), February 21, 1999.

Why start yet another thread on H.J.Res. 17 so soon after the last one?

This was all just discussed in Resolution (H. J. RES 17) to repeal the 22nd ammendment? -- easily located in the "Government" section under "Older Messages (by category)" on the "New Questions" page.

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), February 21, 1999.

Personally I would rather see the President limited to a single six year term. Or perhaps allowed to serve multiple terms, but not in sequence. And not allowed to hold any elected or appointed position in the interim either.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), February 21, 1999.

Well, Spam.

It does seem to have some added relevance in light of the goings on in Texas. I frankly don't believe the subject is beyond wonderment and continued discussion at this stage of the game and it does deserve some adding to.

If you read my entire post, I did ask if we had a contributor on this forum from the state of Connecticut. I did not send the emails without a specific purpose in mind. I WOULD LIKE A RESPONSE FROM THE TWO CONGRESSMEN! Though I have no dillusions about receiving an answer, I'll simply ask you. Would you not like an answer?

I wonder how many have even bothered to send an email requesting enlightenment on subjects brought up on this forum - no more or less than many other "redundant posts" we run into. We seem to take facts for facts, even when they sometimes are not. I thought this was a matter of getting at the truth - including Y2K.

Keep The Faith!

BW

-- Bob Walton (waltonb@kdsi.net), February 21, 1999.

Bob -- So you could have added to an existing thread instead of starting a new one, right?

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), February 22, 1999.