Results 1 to 10 of 21
-
March 27th, 2009, 09:47 PM #1
H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
WTF is going on in Congress that anyone would even want to propose such an amendment??
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 41
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit the President from entering into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 25, 2009
Mrs. BACHMANN (for herself, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. KIRK, Ms. FOXX, Mr. PITTS, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. WAMP, Ms. FALLIN, Mr. FLEMING, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. AKIN, Mr. ISSA, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. PAUL, Mr. CULBERSON, Mrs. BIGGERT, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. JONES, Mr. POSEY, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, and Mr. CONAWAY) 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 prohibit the President from entering into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.
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 President may not enter into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.'.Μολὼν λάβε
-
March 27th, 2009, 09:50 PM #2Active Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
-
Seattle,
Washington
- Age
- 38
- Posts
- 106
- Rep Power
- 19
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
This is a "little" stupid. I mean really stupid actually.
-
March 27th, 2009, 09:59 PM #3
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
Is there renewed talk about the Amero? I'm gonna research this more.
Μολὼν λάβε
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:03 PM #4
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
I just wish Mrs. Bachman would read and defend the Constitution like she already swore to defend. Just because the President has been negotiating treaties for as long as I have been alive doesn't change the fact that it's Congress's job.
The currency thing came up because of article from the UN and Geithner saying two different things about this.One thing to Congress, something totally different to the CFR.
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:05 PM #5Active Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
-
Seattle,
Washington
- Age
- 38
- Posts
- 106
- Rep Power
- 19
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:15 PM #6
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
From what I gathered from reading the UN stuff this will not be based on the US economy, hence not the Amero. More like a worldo. Those in a position of power int the UN would create a new currency and control it's value and all other currencies.
Her's a link from reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...52H2CY20090318
Here's Geithner's two faced answers:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/two-face...-currency.htmlLast edited by stephpd; March 27th, 2009 at 10:26 PM.
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:16 PM #7
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
Yes this is all regarding Turbo Tax Tims slip about supporting the idea of a single world currency, this is actually a scheduled topic for discussion at the upcoming G20 Summit Plus the revelation today that the UN is pushing an initiative on Global Warming that would essentially result in the infamous " One World Govt " we have all feared was unlikely but desired by some .
Given the unprecedanted push that Congress and NObama have made in 3 short months to grab every shred of power they can , consequences be damned , Im actually glad to see Ms Bachman throwing as many spike strips in the path of the juggernaut as she possibly can !
The look on Geithners face when Bachman kept insisting that he point to where exactly in the Constitution did the power come from to do what he was proposing was priceless ! He was completley dumbfounded , I mean the guy literally looked like he just woke up in the middle of a pop quiz on astrophysics or something and was totally lost on the proper answerSi vis pacem, para bellum
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. -- Sigmund Freud
Proud to be an Enemy of The State
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:29 PM #8
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:40 PM #9
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
I was talking with a fellow employee about two days ago on this subject. Basically it revolved around the entire world using one/same currency. It being one of the only ways to get us out of the financial mess the world is in. I can see where this bill is coming from.
““Liberty is the right to choose. Freedom is the result of the right choice.””
-Anonymous
Jeff
-
March 27th, 2009, 10:41 PM #10
Re: H. J. RES. 41 :: prohibit the President from entering into a treaty
The constitution already requires that all treaties be approved by a 2/3 vote of the Senate. The President can't enter the US into a treaty by himself.
Sometimes makes me wonder if some of our elected officials have ever actually read the Constitution.
Section. 2.
Clause 1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.Last edited by eXceLon; March 27th, 2009 at 10:44 PM.
Similar Threads
-
Obama-Concealed Carry Prohibit
By John-Pa in forum Concealed CarryReplies: 22Last Post: April 17th, 2008, 06:24 PM -
Petition to U.S. Senate: Just Say “NO” to Sea Treaty
By Lambo in forum GeneralReplies: 4Last Post: November 14th, 2007, 11:26 PM -
LOST treaty
By TwistedCopper in forum GeneralReplies: 4Last Post: October 21st, 2007, 11:48 AM -
Does your company prohibit carry?
By BearTitan in forum GeneralReplies: 40Last Post: April 9th, 2007, 09:39 PM -
For business who prohibit arms
By CCinPA in forum GeneralReplies: 18Last Post: January 10th, 2007, 07:59 AM
Bookmarks