If Bush is Impeached: The Presidential Line of Succession

[On Par]

Some of the names have changed, but even if Bush/Cheney get impeached, it doesn't look like a good line-up too me. The best thing Bush could have done was to have worse people behind him! Anyone feel confortable having Condi Rice as President?

Here is the Presidential line of succession, as specified by 3 USC 19 (and the current officer holder):


1. Vice President (Richard B. Cheney)
2. Speaker of the House of Representatives (Dennis Hastert)
3. President pro tempore of the Senate (Ted Stevens)
4. Secretary of State (Condi Rice)
5. Secretary of the Treasury (John W. Snow)
6. Secretary of Defense (Donald H. Rumsfeld)
7. Attorney General (John Ashcroft)
8. Secretary of the Interior (Gale Norton)
9. Secretary of Agriculture (Ann M. Veneman)
10. Secretary of Commerce (Donald L. Evans)
11. Secretary of Labor (Elaine L. Chao, ineligible)
12. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Tommy G. Thompson)
13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (vacant)
14. Secretary of Transportation (Norman Yoshio Mineta)
15. Secretary of Energy (Spencer Abraham)
16. Secretary of Education (Roderick Paige)
17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs (Anthony J. Principi)
18. Secretary of Homeland Security (Tom Ridge)

It should be noted that an official cannot succeed to the Presidency without meeting the Constitutional requirements. Of the above candidates, Secretary Elaine Chao is constitutionally ineligible to assume the Presidency, as she is not a natural born citizen. Since Article Two establishes only eligibility requirements for the "office of President", and since these officials, according to the Constitution, "act as President", it had been a subject of controversy whether they would be eligible (the same Constitutional question also exists for the residency and age requirements). To avoid a needless Constitutional dispute at what would be a time of great crisis, the statute, at 3 USC 19(e), specifies that even the acting President must meet the Constitutional requirements for the office of President.


Theories regarding exhaustion of the list

Though the statutory list of Presidential succession only has 18 candidates, there are conspiracy theories about the existence of a much longer, secret list that lists hundreds of politicians. Though it is possible a longer list could have been devised as a part of the Continuity of Operations Plan in the anticipation of nuclear war, such a list would be unlikely to have any legal or constitutional standing.

[Spectral]

1. Isn't it Alexander Haig?

:evilgrin:

[indie_voter]

25. ROFL!! n/t

[prodigal_green]

2. Tom Ridge has to come off that list

he resigned.

[Spectral]

3. And Ashcroft

He's gone too

[Moochy]

4. Dont forget the Torturer General

#7 = Alberto Gonzales

[johnaries]

5. The current Repub House won't vote to impeach anyway. So,

we have to take back Congress in 2006. Then, we'll have a Dem Speaker of the House (Conyers?) and we can impeach Bush and Cheney. Then the Dem Speaker will become Pres.

That's what I hope for, anyway.

[Spectral]

7. Any idea of what our chances are in 2006?

:donut:

[Griffy]

27. EXCELLENT chances.. especially if the truth is out by then...

then we go into the election, take the house.. name the speaker and IMPEACH!

[BlueIris]

6. Thanks for reminding us of the basics, anyway.

Ah, the "I" word. Love it.

[doodadem]

8. LOL! Half the people on this list are now gone!

Ashcroft, Evans, Ridge, Norton, Thompson,....
I would think if they managed to impeach Bush, it would necessarily take down Cheney and Rice at the same time. So yeah, we'd be stuck with Hastert. Didn't that scenario play out on the "West Wing"?

[NewJeffCT]

9. Rod Paige is gone, too

I think Margaret Spellings replaced him.

[tmorelli415]

10. Rotten from the top down ...

if you ask me... (something my grandpa would have said, so I thought it was appropriate)

[MsTryska]

11. I say we make it to Numer 13.

that appears to be the only bright spot on the list.


we've got lots of impeaching to do.

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. If we should somehow take back the senate in '06, wouldn't

#3 be Nancy Pelosi?

[cascadiance]

16. I believe so...

A question I have though is...

If the impeachment went through now and both Bush and Cheney were removed, it would fall to Hastert to take over before 2006. If in 2006, the Dems take over the House, would Hastert still stay on as president, or would it switch over to Pelosi then? Obviously if it is the former, then it would be less desirable for Dems to get an impeachment now, and if it looks like impeachment of both Cheney and Bush were inevitable, the Rethugs might actually move up the timetable to impeach them so that they can get in Hastert in before 2006, instead of Pelosi in after that time. That would be a key fillibuster battle then, to avoid Hastert being put in charge permanently, etc. until after 2006. I'm sure that a po'd public would want to ensure that Pelosi got put in power then too, which would factor in their voting for the House, if impeachment were imminent then.

[3waygeek]

24. Not unless Pelosi

runs for the Senate and wins; she's currently the House Minority Leader.

[johnaries]

28. Welcome to DU! But 3rd in line is the Speaker of the House.

So Pelosi would be after the VP if he is removed and she gets Speaker.

[johnaries]

30. The Speaker is "chosen" by the House, so it wouldn't

automatically be Pelosi. Considering how active Conyers has been, he would be my first choice.

[LiberalEsto]

13. Utterly depressing list

Back in the Nixon era, Tricky Dick's insurance policy against impeachment was having the loathsome Spiro Agnew as VP.

Fortunately for all of us, they nailed Spiro on corruption charges and he stepped down. Nixon named Gerry Ford as the new VP, paving the path toward impeachment. Of course, Nixon resigned in disgrace before impeachment could take place.

[Spectral]

14. President Rummy?

That's a bit on the scary side.

[Chicago1]

15. When Votergate explodes & the evidence is presented

the whole government will fall because the present government is ILLIGITMATE. You have to remove everyone and I know there's this thing called the Constitution, however, we still have the precedent of the Ukraine to follow.

You can't have an illigitamate (sp??) government in place. The same is true for the Ukraine...the WHOLE government had to be removed.


Waiting for the IMPEACHMENT WHILE THE SCANDALS KEEP UNFOLDING
America's Work Stories
http://usaworkstories.blogspot.com
[e-mail]

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. It might be the appropriate thing to do,

but in reality, removing more than one, or two at the most, from the top postitionns would be seen as a coup, and would prompt a RW counter coup.

Seriously. Civil war.

[Freddie Stubbs]

31. Civil war? I wonder which side has more guns?

This is not a road anyone here wants to take.

[bunny planet]

17. My, my , my , what a lot of stellar fall back choices we have.

Guess they'll all have to go.

[ClassWarrior]

18. So what?

VISUALIZE IMPEACHMENT.

NGU. :patriot:

[cascadiance]

19. Norm Mineta is a Dem too.

He was my congressman in the Bay Area. But at #14, it would be easier to get a Dem Speaker of the House to take over with that list in front of him.

I'm sure that the Rethugs would try to appoint a "clean" #13 to fill that vacant spot before handing it to Mineta.

[Kazak]

20. Pelosi?

If we can win back control the House, she'll be right in line. :)

[On Par]

22. Is It Too Late To Bring Back Tip O'Neill ?

[Nikki Stone 1]

23. From the dead?

Aren't we a little premature picking successors? Not that it's not a hoot. :)

[streblin]

26. =^ )

:rofl:

[On Par]

33. Do you think a dead Tip....

...would be worse than what we have in Hassert and Delay?

[FreedomAngel82]

29. That's why

we have to win back 2006 so Pelosi can be the head of the House and then we can impeach him and Pelosi will choose who the president and vice president is.

[Justpat]

32. One's worse than the other.

Good grief, what a collection of bastards.