GracieMansion
(13 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:32 AM
Original message |
Question: Could Obama choose Bill as his running mate? |
|
Is this constitutionally possible?
|
Avalon6
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:33 AM
Response to Original message |
1. No because if he became president suddenly, he would be serving more than 2 terms |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:36 AM by Avalon6
I think they talked about this in 2004 with Kerry's VP pick.
|
tedoll78
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
6. Actually.. look at the specific wording of the 22nd amendment. |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:38 AM by tedoll78
The amendment limits one from being "elected" to the office for more than two terms.
There's one other route (succession) to the presidency, and the 22nd doesn't touch that route.
Thus, Clinton would technically be eligible to the vice-presidency, since he's not forbidden from serving as President - he's only forbidden from being elected to that office.
on edit: I have no doubt that the authors of the 22nd intended to prevent three terms, no matter which route.. but they should've chosen their words more carefully instead of leaving this back door open.
|
Avalon6
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. Key phrase is "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible" |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:40 AM by Avalon6
...for VP
According to the 12th amendment. Pretty clear to me.
"The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
|
tedoll78
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. Thanks for building my argument. |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:43 AM by tedoll78
He's forbidden from being elected to the office. He is not forbidden from holding the office.
Those are two distinct things, and the wording of the 22nd only prohibits one of them. Re-read the amendment.
“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.”
|
Avalon6
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
16. What about this clause |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:46 AM by Avalon6
"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"
If Bill Clinton were to serve more than 2 years of Obama's term, he wouldn't be eligible to be elected for more than 1 term. Problem is he was elected to 2 terms already. I would think that under this scenario, if Bill had never been elected to president before he could only be elected for 1 term at this point. However, it's confusing because it does not explicitly state what happens if you become president before you became VP.
|
tedoll78
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:48 AM by tedoll78
Once again.. that carefully-selected wording prevents him from being elected to the office.
It does not explicitly forbid him from holding the office via succession. If the authors had intended a limit on succession, they would've seen fit to cover that route to the office.
|
Avalon6
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
20. I disagree. You're saying someone could circumvent the constiution and serve more than two terms |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:52 AM by Avalon6
Say someone has already served 2 terms as president. If he wanted a third term, he could simply tell the voters to elect a proxy candidate and have that candidate select him as VP. Once elected, that candidate would resign and the person who has already served 2 terms would become president and essentially be serving a third term.
|
tedoll78
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
21. You can disagree all you want. |
|
It still doesn't change the wording of the amendment.
|
Avalon6
(206 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
24. The courts look at implied meaning of the constiution |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:56 AM by Avalon6
Surely, the congress that approved this amendment had the intention that a person could not serve more than two terms as president. Thus, you're interpretation would allow a person to de facto, serve more than two terms as president.
|
tedoll78
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #24 |
|
The intent/spirit of the amendment would seem to prevent such a thing from happening. But the authors are smart folks, surely scholars of Constitutional laws and semantics. So I'm less likely to buy into the whole "they didn't write it so, but what they really meant was.." line of argument. If they'd intended to put a limit on both presidential routes - election and succession - they would've done so. Instead, they left one untouched.
|
Radical Activist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
19. Same thing. We're not talking about electing Bill President. |
flor de jasmim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:34 AM
Response to Original message |
2. He was impeached, so I think that means he cannot run for public office again... |
endarkenment
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. no that does not mean that |
goldcanyonaz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
TheDebbieDee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:35 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:36 AM by TheDebbieDee
If Bill Clinton, then no! Clinton has served 2 terms as President and is constitutionally exempted from serving as President for any other terms.
Edited because I wasn't trying to be a smarta$$.......
|
endarkenment
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:35 AM
Response to Original message |
4. The constitution does not directly cover this case, |
|
Fortunately Obama is not a moron so you won't have to worry your little zombie brain about it.
|
harun
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
13. They asked Bill about this a few years back. He said about that |
|
That this type of thing isn't really covered explicitly. So one can't point to a law and say "No they cannot", but existing laws bring up a number of problems.
|
AJH032
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
18. I thought the constitution was pretty clear. |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-11-08 10:47 AM by AJH032
that one has to be eligible for the office of the Presidency. Bill has already served 2 terms, and is thus ineligible (22nd amendment).
|
2008
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
23. The key phrase is "elected to the office of the President" |
|
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.
He could be elected VP. He could then become President again if something happened to the sitting President. He could serve out the rest of that term. But he couldn't run for reelection.
|
musette_sf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:36 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Judy Ruiliani, is that you?
|
ellacott
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
10. That didn't last long |
Hawkeye-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. Wonder if that's our LAST GDP troll on record? |
ellacott
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
They reminded me of a kid running full force into the wall.:crazy: :nuke:
|
NotThisTime
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:39 AM
Response to Original message |
12. I heard this discussed on the news & they said in fact he could be VP.... |
raebrek
(467 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-11-08 10:52 AM
Response to Original message |
22. He would have to be elected with Mr. Obama so I think |
|
that means he couldn't be on the ticket.
Raebrek!!!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:24 PM
Response to Original message |