CDR: Re: A successful lawsuit means Gore wins!
Jim Choate[SMTP:ravage@einstein.ssz.com] wrote:
What happens if by the day the new president is to take his oath there is still no clear winner? Even if the candidates get together and one is a gracious loser, the trauma won't be lessened. There will be literaly no faith in the president. What would Congress need to do in order to pass an emergency resolution that would allow the current president to stay in office until the issue is resolved. Could this be a new way to get a third term? Would the vice-president (who serves when the president can't) then be the next in line (assume the speaker of the house would be next if memory serves)?
One of the good results of the current stalemate is that many of us are getting crash courses in constitutional law. This is covered by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. See http://www.greatsource.com/amgov/almanac/documents/key/1947_psa_1.html There would be appointed an acting president, who would stay in office only until the election was settled. The order of sucession goes; President Clinton Vice President Gore Speaker of the House Hastert President pro-tem of the Senate Gore Secretary of State Albright Secretary of the Treasury Secretary of Defense Attorney General Reno Postmaster General Secretary of the Navy Secretary of the Interior Secretary of Agriculture Secretary of Commerce Secretary of Labor I suspect that the upshot would be that Clinton would stay in office for a while. The other alternative is that the already appointed electors vote, leaving out the unappointed Florida electors. This would throw the race to Gore. Peter Trei
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Trei, Peter wrote:
One of the good results of the current stalemate is that many of us are getting crash courses in constitutional law.
This is covered by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. See http://www.greatsource.com/amgov/almanac/documents/key/1947_psa_1.html
Actualy it isn't. It's covered by the 20th amendment, section 3. It also invalidates the point Declan was trying to make on the 12th (guess he should take his own advice). http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/amend.html Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as Presdent until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such a person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified. Looks to me like Congress could leave Bill in office until this mess is over. Like I said, is this a new way to win a 3rd term? ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
In <Pine.LNX.3.96.1001110151709.730r-100000@einstein.ssz.com>, on 11/10/00 at 03:24 PM, Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> said:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Trei, Peter wrote:
One of the good results of the current stalemate is that many of us are getting crash courses in constitutional law.
This is covered by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. See http://www.greatsource.com/amgov/almanac/documents/key/1947_psa_1.html
Actualy it isn't. It's covered by the 20th amendment, section 3.
It also invalidates the point Declan was trying to make on the 12th (guess he should take his own advice).
Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as Presdent until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such a person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Looks to me like Congress could leave Bill in office until this mess is over. Like I said, is this a new way to win a 3rd term?
I am not sure that they would as this seems to go against the 22nd Amendment. While the 22nd doesn't specifically address an appointed acting president I doubt that the new congress would be inclined to keep Clinton around nor would they want to create more problems while trying to straighten out the current mess. Amendment XXII (1951) Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html ---------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, William H. Geiger III wrote:
I am not sure that they would as this seems to go against the 22nd Amendment. While the 22nd doesn't specifically address an appointed acting president I doubt that the new congress would be inclined to keep Clinton around nor would they want to create more problems while trying to straighten out the current mess.
I am also not sure. It's the reason I was asking if this might be a way around the 22nd. After all it isn't an election but an appointment by Congress until the election is resolved. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
In <Pine.LNX.3.96.1001110171824.730z-100000@einstein.ssz.com>, on 11/10/00 at 05:19 PM, Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> said:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, William H. Geiger III wrote:
I am not sure that they would as this seems to go against the 22nd Amendment. While the 22nd doesn't specifically address an appointed acting president I doubt that the new congress would be inclined to keep Clinton around nor would they want to create more problems while trying to straighten out the current mess.
I am also not sure. It's the reason I was asking if this might be a way around the 22nd. After all it isn't an election but an appointment by Congress until the election is resolved.
I am rather torn on the issue. On the one hand leaving Clinton in would lend an appearance of stability "we are not changing anything until we get this mess sorted out" while on the other hand I feel that it would interfere with the principle that "the office is stronger than any one man". We have dealt with war & assassinations and still have been able to change Presidents without problems. As things look right now I don't see the US facing any immediate crises that would mandate keeping Clinton in office (something major like nukes going off, full scale domestic revolt, ...ect) so I am leaning to congress appointing someone other than him to act as acting President until the mess is straightened out. Wether that person is a Democrat or a Republican doesn't seem that important as he really wouldn't be doing anything unless we wind up at war with someone. If this election does wind up being decided in Congress it will be the biggest game of chicken since the Cuban Missle Crises. Should be interesting to see who blinks first. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html ---------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, William H. Geiger III wrote:
...ect) so I am leaning to congress appointing someone other than him to act as acting President until the mess is straightened out. Wether that person is a Democrat or a Republican doesn't seem that important as he really wouldn't be doing anything unless we wind up at war with someone.
If this election does wind up being decided in Congress it will be the biggest game of chicken since the Cuban Missle Crises. Should be interesting to see who blinks first.
I've been trying to figure out who might be acceptable on such a short term notice? ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
In <Pine.LNX.3.96.1001110195350.730B-100000@einstein.ssz.com>, on 11/10/00 at 07:57 PM, Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> said:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, William H. Geiger III wrote:
...ect) so I am leaning to congress appointing someone other than him to act as acting President until the mess is straightened out. Wether that person is a Democrat or a Republican doesn't seem that important as he really wouldn't be doing anything unless we wind up at war with someone.
If this election does wind up being decided in Congress it will be the biggest game of chicken since the Cuban Missle Crises. Should be interesting to see who blinks first.
I've been trying to figure out who might be acceptable on such a short term notice?
How about Powell ? -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html ---------------------------------------------------------------
At 03:24 PM 11/10/00 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Trei, Peter wrote:
This is covered by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. See http://www.greatsource.com/amgov/almanac/documents/key/1947_psa_1.html
Actualy it isn't. It's covered by the 20th amendment, section 3.
The 20th Amendment was ratified in 1933. Therefore the 1947 law implements the " Congress may by law provide for the case" part of the 20th. (Unfortunately, the Postmaster General is fairly high up the list :-) The 20th does say that Congress can do whatever they want about it, so they could easily supersede the 1947 act. Anyway, Al Haig's in charge.
Looks to me like Congress could leave Bill in office until this mess is over. Like I said, is this a new way to win a 3rd term?
By the 23rd Amendment ("FDR Reoccurrance Prevention Amendment"), he can't be _elected_ to win a 3rd term - but that doesn't mean he can't be appointed, though .... What a bad idea that would be.... In general, the 23rd trumps previous amendments, as any newer law supersedes the older one, but it's not clear there's a conflict. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
On Sat, 11 Nov 2000, Bill Stewart wrote:
The 20th Amendment was ratified in 1933. Therefore the 1947 law implements the " Congress may by law provide for the case" part of the 20th.
No Bill, that's not what it means at all. The 1947 law requires there to already be a sitting President, it doesn't apply if the candidates haven't 'qualified'. It was at least partialy implemented to identify the chain of command in case of nuclear/devastating attack. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
participants (6)
-
Bill Stewart -
Damien＠hell.com -
Jim Choate -
Jim Choate -
Trei, Peter -
William H. Geiger III