The fatal flaw of the 25th Amendment & legislation to fix it - Congressman Blumenauer (D-OR)

[Amaryllis]

"The erratic behavior of Donald Trump has raised new questions about his mental and emotional capacity to discharge the tremendous burdens of the most powerful position in the world. It is the president who has the ability to launch nuclear weapons, unleashing untold devastation on the world. Presidents can create diplomatic chaos or move markets with the most carefully crafted declarations, let alone late-night tweets with the grammar and misspellings of a fifth-grader and decidedly unpresidential tone.
Share your opinion
Submit your essay of 500 words or less to [e-mail]. Please include your email and phone number for verification.

Regardless of what happens with Donald Trump, this issue will arise again. Presidents are subject to illness, accident, or--God forbid--physical attack. Americans are living longer. The current occupant of the White House assumed office at the age of 70. While the president of the United States has access to the best health care in the world, there is no guarantee of successful medical intervention or that he or she would be fully functional during the course of treatment and recovery.

There is no better time for Americans to acquaint (or reacquaint) themselves with the provisions of the 25th Amendment, its history, application, and potential problems and to consider solutions.

And it has inherent flaws that need to be addressed. The amendment's default decision-makers-- the vice president and the cabinet -- have a natural bias toward the existing officeholder that would make them reluctant to acknowledge the president's inability to serve. Additionally, in the case of a president who is suffering from mental illness and is emotionally unstable or irrational, there is no fail safe to prevent him or her from simply firing the entire cabinet to prevent the application of the amendment.

The alternative process spelled out by the amendment leaves the decision to the vice president and a so-far-undefined body created by Congress. This body needs to be determined. I'm exploring legislation that would designate that "other body" to be composed of a majority of former presidents and vice presidents to be a part of that deliberation. This group of people understands the pressures of the office and what's necessary to discharge the responsibilities. Further, they all won national elections and were tested by actually discharging the responsibilities.


MOre:
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/02/the_fatal_flaw_of_the_25th_ame.html

[unblock]

1. ugh, not sure that's any better.

first, donnie would eventually become part of that "other body", deciding which future presidents stay and which go.

second, presidents and vice-presidents are highly partisan, and, other than two-term presidents, may well have ambitions to a future presidency themselves, which could certainly compromise their decision.


i applaud the effort to flesh out this part of the amendment, just not sure this is the right way to do it.

[JudyM]

2. Yes, partisanship is a problem. But who wouldn't be partisan? Whatever the committee, it would

ideally be comprised of an equal # of Dems and repukes because, as we're facing now, the repukes don't seem to want to get rid of him even though he's clearly not fit for the job.

[unblock]

3. yeah. imagine if this "other body" was majority republican.

they'd kick out democratic presidents just for the fun of it, or until they got a dino.

equal numbers might be better, though i don't like enshrining the established parties in law (i know, way too late for that).