Is this another flaw in our Constitution?

[PJMcK]

As has been pointed out elsewhere, the Speaker does not have to be an elected member of the House of Representatives. There’s even talk of nominating Trump for the position.

My question is this: If the Speaker hasn’t been elected by any constituents, the position is filled by votes from the majority party. Should the President and Vice President be unable to fulfill their duties, the country would have a President who never faced the nation’s voters, only the Representatives from the majority party.

That doesn’t seem very democratic.

[Walleye]

1. Like Gerald Ford

[Dave says]

16. Not sure I understand your post - Ford was an elected member of the House

[Effete Snob]

22. Now do Vice President Rockefeller

[treestar]

38. He was never elected President/Vice President

The VP space was left vacant until a 1960s amendment.

AFter that amendment, a vacant VP slot results in the President nominating a candidate who serves if approved by Congress.

The amendment came just in time, as Spiro Agnew, Nixon's VP, resigned. Nixon nominated Ford, who was approved.

But he had never faced the voters directly.

[Walleye]

42. Yes I'm sorry I thought you meant not elected by the whole country. I misread

I think I better take a break from this stuff. The human brain can only take so much

[RicROC]

2. yes, good point.

I did not even approve when VP needed to be replaced in that POTUS just selects another. Instead, the highest elected official of that party should move into the VP position (Senate first, HR 2nd)

[WestMichRad]

6. One time in our nation's history has a VP not been elected to that position.

Gerald R Ford was nominated as VP (to replace Spiro Agnew) by senior Congressional leaders. His nomination was confirmed by large bipartisan margins in both the Senate and the House before he took the oath of office as vice president.

President Nixon was given no choice in the matter, other than his asking Congressional leaders what to do to fill the vacancy created by Agnes’s resignation.

All that said, I don’t think there is any guidance in the Constitution how a mid-term VP vacancy is to be filled. With Ford, Congressional leaders were just doing what they thought was proper to fill the vacancy.

[Effete Snob]

9. Please acquaint yourself with the 25th Amendment

AMENDMENT XXV - Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified February 10, 1967.

Section 1.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
-----

No they were not "just doing what they thought was proper". They were doing what the Constitution says to do.

Ford was appointed VP by Nixon when Agnew resigned, according to the 25th Amendment.

Ford became president when Nixon resigned, according to the 25th Amendment.

Ford then appointed Rockefeller to the vacant VP slot, according to the 25th Amendment.

That Amendment has, in my lifetime, gotten more of a workout than the 3rd one. But for whatever reason, people are well-prepared to object to soldiers being quartered in their living rooms.

[Hugin]

24. I can sympathize with the poster's mistake...

As I was growing up, I was led to believe we lived in a representative democracy. I was chagrined to learn how wrong I was and I set out to determine what kind of ocracy this was. It seems to be a hollerocracy or possibly a hubristicocracy.

Money and back patting seems to have something to do with it.

I’d like to try a representative democracy. They seem nice.

[Effete Snob]

28. .

[Hugin]

29. !

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

55. Oh please

Those of us who paid attention in US history class have known we don't elect VPs. We have known that people figured out that running the VP separate was a bad idea, all the way back in 1796, when the vote split between two parties, and wreaked nothing but havoc for the next four years.

Ever since then, we've had zero choice in selecting any VP. We've elected a POTUS and had to accept the VP choice that POTUS--and only POTUS--made for that position. You voted for the POTUS and went along with whoever the winner picked for VP--because the VP hasn't been your power to choose since 17bloody96.

Since the VP has always been the exclusive choice of the POTUS or POTUS candidate, the 25th lets the bloody POTUS choose whatever bloody replacement he wants if the original person he ran with can't stay in office. Because letting the President choose is 100% consistent with how we've rolled since 1796.

So you're 227 years too late to cry about Nixon choosing Ford or Ford choosing Rockefeler, as allowed as per the Constitution.

[Hugin]

60. I pay attention to who the VP on a ticket is...

For instance, if Trump was a VP on a ticket I wouldn’t vote for that candidate.

Those of us who completely tested out of US history class know that Supreme Court Justices are a far better example of unelected office holders who strip away rights.

Thanks for being so condescending! Have a nice day.

[WestMichRad]

10. Not correct

As Effete S points out in another reply, Nelson Rockefeller was nominated to be VP by President Ford and confirmed by votes in the House and Senate.

[DemocraticPatriot]

50. But they probably don't want it! lol

[brooklynite]

3. You realize that the Constitution doesn't call for the PRESIDENT to face the nation's voters?

All the Constitution says is that States get to choose Electors. No requirement to hold a public election.

[Upthevibe]

4. PJMcK.........

IMHO- For sure a MAJOR flaw (along with all of the others we've seen over the past eight years)

[WestMichRad]

11. How did he get to be VP?

‘Cause he was stinkin’ rich!

[mahatmakanejeeves]

13. Wait, wait:

Went from being a private citizen, unelected to ANY office whatsoever, to being VP - second in line to president?

Governor of New York (1959–1973)

I'm having to look all this up, as it was so long ago. I guess he hadn't been elected to any federal office.

Being governor of New York did give him a sizable bit of governmental executive experience.

Now you've got me wondering just how did it happen that he became VP.

Let's see what was behind doors number 2 and 3:

Vice presidency (1974–1977)

See also: 1974 United States vice presidential confirmation

Upon President Nixon's resignation on August 9, 1974, Vice President Gerald Ford assumed the presidency. On August 20, Ford nominated Rockefeller to be the next Vice President of the United States. In considering potential nominees, Rockefeller was one of three primary candidates. The other two were then-United States Ambassador to NATO Donald Rumsfeld, whom Ford eventually chose as his Chief of Staff and later Secretary of Defense, and then-Republican National Committee Chairman George H. W. Bush, who would eventually become Vice President in his own right for two terms and President for one term.

{snip}

All things considered ...

And good morning.

[Effete Snob]

15. He was appointed by Ford in 1974

Rockefeller HELD NO OFFICE OF ANY KIND in 1974 when he was appointed by Ford, in accordance with the 25th Amendment.

Didn't a lot of us actually live through these events?

[mahatmakanejeeves]

17. Okay, I see. At the TIME he was appointed, he was a private citizen.

But he had earlier held an elective office.

What was he doing immediately before he was governor of NY?

[Effete Snob]

18. Immediately before he was governor of NY...

...he was the governor of NY.

He was the governor of NY for fucking ever.

Prior to that, he was banging his secretary, just as he continued to do after being VP - which is what he was doing when he died.

This is the second thread where I have come to realize that some people here were continuously stoned through the 1970's.

I guess I should point out that my username originated with Vice President Agnew.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

23. I was alive at the time and not stoned continuously.

I recognized, as well, William Safire and Pat Buchanan's writing "styles."

It looks as if Rockefeller spent a lot of time working for the feds before he became governor. He did know his way around various government operations.

[Effete Snob]

26. "He did know his way around various government operations."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Aramco

On 31 January 1944, the company name was changed from California-Arabian Standard Oil Co. to Arabian American Oil Co. (or Aramco). In 1948, Standard Oil of New Jersey (later known as Exxon) purchased 30% and Socony Vacuum (later Mobil) purchased 10% of the company, with SoCal and Texaco retaining 30% each.

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

56. Nelson Rockefeller had extensive government experience

Not elected prior to being NY governor, but he had worked in the State Department, and as an advisor to Harry Truman. He was instrumental in getting Truman to change the Department of War to the Defense Dept, and through the same policy board position, advised the creation of the Department of Education, Health and Welfare.

Immediately before becoming governor, he had started something called the Special Studies Project, a sort of think tank, 1950s style. They studied issues of various kinds and issued reports about them.

So he was no boneheaded choice. Picking him for VP was actually one of the few smart things that Ford did.

[Dave says]

19. I forgot about old Rocky

[Effete Snob]

20. See my username?

Google it.

[rurallib]

25. Nabobs of negativism would have been a good name also

did you listen to Rachel Maddow's podcast on Agnew? Bagman I think was called.
Old Ted was quite the - uh - politician.

[Effete Snob]

27. Yah, if there's ever another name change cycle

I'm definitely more of the nattering nabob type.

[Scrivener7]

63. Well... maybe not.

[PJMcK]

30. Your snark is rather rude

I remember Nixon, Watergate, Ford & Rockefeller very well. I came of age politically during that time.

My OP related to the current circumstances. Obviously, we've discovered a lot of weaknesses in our governing documents.

Enjoy your day.

[Effete Snob]

32. Please DM for a full refund

We are offering a full unconditional refund to all who are unsatisfied with the services.

[Torchlight]

33. Sounds serious.

Good luck.

[Effete Snob]

35. Not even noon...

...and someone is disappointed with me already.

Someday, I'll make it past lunch. Today is not that day.

[Torchlight]

36. ok

[Spazito]

47. Today is definitely not your day.

[sarisataka]

7. Funny how this wasn't a "flaw"

When fantasies of making Hillary Clinton Speaker were popular...

[inthewind21]

39. Amazing

how that changes on a dime isn't it.

[dweller]

8. What the Constitution says is

The House of Representatives shall chuse (sic) their Speaker and other Officers.

No one is saying the officers can be other than elected reps .
I wonder why that is ?
And every speaker has been an elected Rep so far in our govt’s history .

I think this concept that Speaker doesn’t have to be an elected Rep is BS and only became a discussion around 2015 .
Convenient isn’t it .

🤔



✌🏻

[Effete Snob]

21. When did they decide the Pope didn't have to be Italian?

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

31. Saint Peter?

Sorry.

I know you were joking. But the history geek wannabe (not actually good enough at history to claim the title) found it funny.

Had to run to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes_by_country to find many non-Italian popes. My first thought was Rodrigo Borgia/Pope Alexander VI, a Spaniard, but he was by no means the first.

Shutting up now.

[Effete Snob]

34. Nice

For extra points, find the rule that says the Pope has to be Catholic.

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

41. Again, I point you to Rodrigo Borgia ...

... but that is picking nits on actual behavior v. claimed belief.

[onenote]

40. Non-members of the House have been nominated for Speaker on several occasions

The earliest instance I can find is 1997. It also happened in 2013, 2015 (twice), 2019, 2021, and 2023. Of course, none of those nominees received more than a handful of votes. Whether it happened earlier in the nation's history is unclear.

[dweller]

43. If Trump Wants to Be Speaker, He'll Need a House Seat

It’s a constitutional urban legend that anyone other than a current member can lead the chamber.
By Michael Ellis and Greg Dubinsky
Oct. 5, 2023 5:23 pm ET

Paywall article from WSJ, from about 18 hours ago. I’ll copy what I can see.


After the ousting of Speaker Kevin McCarthy this week, some observers have said the House should elect a new speaker from outside its own ranks. Anyone, they say, can be elected speaker. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene even floated the notion of drafting Donald Trump as speaker and claimed in a fundraising email that the former president “just confirmed he would do it.” But a close read of the Constitution shows that the speaker must be a member of the House.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/if-trump-cant-be-speaker-you-need-a-house-seat-mccarthy-gaetz-marjorie-taylor-green-ad74fcf9

Maybe someone can get the whole article


✌🏻

[onenote]

45. Can you briefly summarize their argument?

Because a lot of folks, including constitutional scholars, have reached a different conclusion.

Note that the Official Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House expressly states that the Constitution does not limit eligibility to be speaker to sitting members of the House:


https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPRACTICE-115/pdf/GPO-HPRACTICE-115.pdf

Page 656:

"Article I, section 2 of the Constitution directs that the House choose its Speaker and other officers. The Speaker is the only House officer who traditionally has been chosen from the sitting membership of the House. Manual § 26. The Constitution does not limit eligibility to that class, but the practice has been followed invariably. The Speaker’s term of office usually corresponds with the individual’s term of office as a Member, whereas the other House officers continue in office ‘‘until their successors are chosen and qualified.’’ Clause 1 of rule II; 1 Hinds §187.

[dweller]

46. I posted what I could see

without a subscription




✌🏻

[onenote]

48. I edited my previous post to add a reference to the official Guide to the Rules, Procedure and

Precedents of the House, wherein it is expressly stated that the Constitution does not limit eligibility to become speaker to sitting members of the House.

I'm curious (but not enough to subscribe to the WSJ ), what "close reading" the authors of that article have found that goes against what otherwise seems to be the widely held and accepted reading of the constitution that there is no requirement that the speaker be a member.

[dweller]

49. And I'm curious where in the Constitution does it say it

does not limit eligibility to that class

🤔


✌🏻

[onenote]

52. I'm curious where the Constitution says the speaker must be chosen from among the members.

In this case, silence means that there is no restriction.

[dweller]

53. OK , then by that logic

They (the members of the House) could choose Putin … or even at the writing of the Constitution , it could be the King of England.
Neither are of the class of the members who vote for the Speaker , or other officers .

SMDH


✌🏻

[onenote]

54. And the Senate could confirm Putin as secretary of defense or as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

While the authors of the Constitution were very specific in imposing eligibility requirement for certain offices: President, member of the House, member of the Senate, they were silent on eligibility requirements for other offices, including cabinet offices and judges. In essence, the Constitution relies on the Senate (in the case of the confirmation of cabinet officials and judges ) or the House (in the case of electing a speaker ) to make wise decisions.

[sir pball]

12. Most in the line of succession haven't "faced the nation's voters".

Once you get past veep, Speaker, and President pro tem, it's all Cabinet appointees:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

[Torchlight]

37. I don't see it as an inherant flaw.

I beieve the position, like most imaginary things (governments, religions, borders, etc), can be used for either good or bad dependent on the individual.

[2naSalit]

44. It's manner in which...

It is interpreted and carried out. With this cult, it's like we're dealing with children of the corn... nothing is safe around them.

[Shrek]

51. The line of succession is not part of the constitution

It's a federal law passed by Congress.

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

57. Good grief

Show me where you voted for the VP.

You voted for the POTUS, and went along with his choice of VP, but you did not elect that position directly. Did you have a separate line on your ballot to vote for VP?

Not one American has voted for the VP since 1796, because that was when the country learned how bloody stupid it was to have the President and VP run on their own tickets. I'll give you a hint: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson did not play well together at that level of power.

So why be upset now if an "un-elected" person gets into office? Nine technically "un-elected" people have become POTUS, and only now are you not okay with it?

Makes no sense.

[former9thward]

58. What about the Vice President?

No one votes for him or her as a separate ballot position. Yet if the President leaves us we immediately have the VP in that spot. Not very democratic either.

[Hugin]

61. Supreme Court Justices are a far better example. n/t

[Polybius]

59. I like it, cool little technically that likely will never happen

Ford never was even elected Vice President. The country survived.