Two bills are hanging around before our elected officials, one in Congress and one in the Kentucky legislature. It’s somewhat amazing how some of these horrendous bills lurk in the background until someone with an inquisitive nature sniffs them out and brings them to the attention of the public.
In early 2025, Rep. Andy Ogles (R. TN) introduced H.J. Res. 29, which proposes a constitutional amendment to allow a president to run for a third term. Reading the resolution clearly illustrates that it is designed solely for the benefit of President Trump, given the way it refers to non-concurrent terms.
It may be recalled that only two presidents have ever served nonconsecutive terms: Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump. I’m sure the reader is aware that Cleveland is not likely to take advantage of the amendment.
This is a time when we should perhaps be grateful that the constitutional amendment process is so complicated, understanding that two-thirds of each house of Congress must pass the amendment before it is sent to the states, of which 38 must also ratify it.
That’s a pretty high hurdle to overcome … thankfully, in this case.
The 22nd Amendment, ratified by the states in 1951, was passed through a Republican-controlled Congress after President Roosevelt had successfully gained a fourth term in office.
There is a certain irony that it is now a Republican who seeks to overturn that amendment.
If two-thirds of our Congress should vote to present this proposal to the states, one could only hope that the voters would take note of the names of those two-thirds and cast them from office as soon as they run again.
Before the terms of Franklin Roosevelt, no president had ever served more than two terms in office, some less than one term when they died in office. But FDR’s multiple elections came at a time of the utmost peril for the United States and the rest of the free world, a time when a change in leadership might have endangered the progress being made to contain dictatorships.
If H.J.Res 29 does not result in a bill before President Trump leaves office, it will likely be relegated to the dustbin, at least until Republicans or Democrats once again want to see their favorite candidate offered a chance to extend a reign as president.
In Kentucky, HB 829, introduced by three Republicans, seeks to make it mandatory that local school districts allow “pupils to attend moral instruction.”
Read that as religious instruction.
This bill is apparently supported by groups like Ohio-based LifeWise Academy, which was recently denied access to Oldham County, Kentucky students.
It’s interesting that the bill, in Section (2)(b), states: “Moral instruction provided under this section shall not take place on school property, unless permitted under a local school board policy authorizing equal access to the use of school property by public members of the community. [bold, underlined, italicized script in original bill]. This is noteworthy because current law does not permit religious instruction on public school property.
Never miss a thing with our FREE weekly newsletter.
This bill also gives the state Attorney General authority to bring civil action against any local school board that refuses to provide for this “moral” instruction.
HB 829 is nothing more than a back-door attempt to bring religious education into the public school classroom (allegedly to take place outside the classroom) again, after the recent unanimous Kentucky Supreme Court decision against using public funds for charter schools.
It is definitely true that vigilance is constantly required for the public to remain aware of legislators’ ongoing efforts to insert religious doctrine into public education.
Hopefully, HB 829 will die a timely and ignominious death before the end of the 2026 session.
