Who will be the President pro-tem of the Senate?

[CTyankee]

My spouse claims that this person would be next in line after Pelosi in presidential succession. Hmm.

I don't know if I am out of touch or not, but I haven't a clue as to who would get the nod.

Help me out here!

[terrya]

1. I imagine Robert Byrd.

Isn't the President Pro Tem of the Senate the Senator who's been there the longest?

[trof]

3. That is the 'custom'. Wikipedia:

The president pro tempore of the United States Senate is the second-highest-ranking official of the Senate and the highest-ranking senator. The Vice President of the United States is the President of the Senate ex officio, and thus is the highest-ranking member of the Senate; during his absence, the President pro tempore presides over the Senate. The President pro tempore is elected by the Senate; by custom, he or she is typically the most senior senator in the majority party. Normally, neither the Vice President of the United States nor the President pro tempore presides; instead, the duty is generally delegated to other senators in the majority party. The President pro tempore, after the House of Representatives' Speaker of the House, is third in line of succession to the Presidency.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_pro_tempore_of_the_United_States_Senate

[longship]

2. Robert Byrd.

:kick:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

4. Leaders and Committee Chair List

Edited on Wed Nov-29-06 02:34 PM by Laura PackYourBags
http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=2658 ...
November 14, 2006



Robert C. Byrd, President Pro Temp
As President pro tempore, Senator Byrd will continue to provide the Democratic Caucus leadership and experience gained from a lifetime of public service.

Dick Durbin, Assistant Majority Leader
As Assistant Majority Leader, Senator Durbin will serve as the Majority Leader’s key aide on and off the floor, helping to lead the Democrats’ fight to protect America and help working families get ahead.

Charles E. Schumer, Vice Chair of the Conference
The third ranking member of the Democratic leadership, Senator Schumer will serve as Vice Chair of the Conference. In this post, Schumer will oversee strategy and policy to keep and build support for Democratic values.

Patty Murray, Secretary of the Conference
As Secretary of the Conference, Senator Murray will play a critical role in helping shape and set the Democratic agenda.

Charles E. Schumer, Chairman of Campaign Committee
In addition to his role as Vice Chair of the Conference, Senator Schumer will once again serve as Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC).

Byron L. Dorgan, Chairman of Policy Committee
As he did during the 109th Congress, Senator Dorgan will continue to provide strong leadership at the Democratic Policy Committee (DPC). Under Senator Dorgan, the DPC has been credited with conducting aggressive Congressional oversight and generating innovative policy ideas for the Democratic Caucus.

Debbie Stabenow, Chair of Steering and Outreach Committee
Senator Stabenow will serve as Chair of the Steering and Outreach Committee. In her role as chair, Senator Stabenow will engage Democratic Senators and community leaders across the country in an active dialogue about the pressing issues facing our nation.

Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of Committee Outreach
As Chairman of Committee Outreach, Senator Bingaman will provide a voice in the Democratic leadership for Committee Chairs. Bingaman will harness the Committee Chairs’ tremendous knowledge and experience, and ensure their important committee work is advanced in a united and consistent manner.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, Vice Chair of Committee Outreach
As Vice Chair of Committee Outreach, Senator Clinton will work closely with Senator Bingaman in helping to coordinate the committee work of the Democratic Caucus.

Blanche L. Lincoln, Chair of Rural Outreach
As she did in the 109th Congress, Senator Lincoln will again serve as Chair of Rural Outreach. This position was created in the last Congress as a sign of the Democrats’ strong commitment to aggressively engage and communicate with rural Americans. In this post, Senator Lincoln will continue guide rural outreach for the Caucus and find new ways to reach rural, suburban and exurban American communities.

Barbara Boxer, Chief Deputy Whip
As Chief Deputy Whip, Senator Boxer will continue to be responsible for managing and implementing Caucus efforts on the Senator floor. Working as the “right hand” of the Democratic Leader and Assistant Democratic Leader, Boxer plays an instrumental role in articulating, advancing and achieving the objectives of the Democratic Caucus.

Thomas R. Carper, Deputy Whip

Bill Nelson, Deputy Whip

Russell D. Feingold, Deputy Whip

Serving as Deputy Whips, Senators Carper, Nelson and Feingold will play critical roles in marshalling the Caucus’s forces.

http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=2660 ...

Anticipated Committee Democratic Assignments for the 110th Congress

(Subject to Steering Committee and Caucus approval)


Agriculture CHAIR: Harkin

Appropriations CHAIR: Byrd

Armed Services CHAIR: Levin

Banking CHAIR: Dodd

Commerce CHAIR: Inouye

Energy CHAIR: Bingaman

Environment Public Works CHAIR: Boxer

Finance CHAIR: Baucus

Foreign Relations CHAIR: Biden

HELP CHAIR: Kennedy

Homeland and Government Affairs CHAIR: Lieberman

Judiciary CHAIR: Leahy

Intelligence CHAIR: Rockefeller

Budget CHAIR: Conrad

Aging CHAIR: Kohl

Veterans CHAIR: Akaka

Small Business CHAIR: Kerry

Rules CHAIR: Feinstein

Joint Economic CHAIR: Schumer

Indian Affairs CHAIR: Dorgan

[Lasher]

5. Your spouse is correct, Byrd will be third in the presidential line of succession

Senator Byrd has served as President Pro Tempore 5 times: In the 101st, 102nd, and 103rd Congress and twice in the 107th. The Constitution specifies that the Vice President shall succeed the President. The rest of the line of succession is provided by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947.

The 25th Amendment to the Constitution allows the President to nominate a Vice President should the Vice Presidency become vacant. While not directly impacting the Presidential Succession Act per se, the ratification of the amendment has significantly reduced the likelihood (barring catastrophic circumstances) of a Speaker of the House of Representatives or President Pro Tempore of the Senate being needed to act as President.

Had the 25th Amendment not been passed, Democrat Carl Albert would have become President upon Nixon's resignation.

When Reagan was shot on March 30, 1981 Vice President Bush was temporarily unavailable. Secretary of State Alexander Haig famously announced that he was in charge because he was next in the line of succession. The Presidential Succession Act of 1886 did provide that the Secretary of State would be next in line after the Vice President, but apparently Haig forgot that the Act of 1947 superseded it and made the Secretary of State fourth in the line of succession after the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Haig and others have since tried to say that he actually meant something else. But a series of audiotapes, which were recorded by national security advisor Richard Allen at the time, confirm Haig's explosion of ignorance. After being in a drawer for two decades, the tapes surfaced in 2001 to the surprise and annoyance of some who were there.

Over the next few hours, three men would assert control of the Situation Room and U.S. nuclear forces. When it was clear the president was unconscious, Haig famously declared himself in charge.

“So the ... helm is right here,” he (Haig) said at the time. “And that means right in this chair for now, constitutionally, until the vice president gets here.”

<snip>

Haig answered the reporter: “Constitutionally gentlemen, you have the president, the vice president and the secretary of state, in that order, and should the president decide he wants to transfer the helm to the vice president, he will do so. As for now, I’m in control here, in the White House, pending the return of the vice president and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/04/23/60II/main287292.shtml

Edit: typo

[suston96]

8. Actually.......

If Haig had left the "Constitutionally" out of the sentence he would have been correct.

“Constitutionally gentlemen, you have the president, the vice president and the secretary of state, in that order, and should the president decide he wants to transfer the helm to the vice president, he will do so. As for now, I’m in control here, in the White House, pending the return of the vice president and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.”

In the daily running of the Executive Branch, if the President and the Vice-President are out of the house, (as was the case when Reagan was shot) the Secretary of State would be "in charge". Now that is NOT presidential succession. It is just conducting Executive Branch business, such as cabinet meetings. In fact, Haig did say that until the Vice-President came back, he was "in charge".

I doubt if the Speaker of the House or the President Pro Tem of the Senate would be scurrying over to the West Wing whenever the two top Executives are absent.

I am not talking about presidential succession. I am talking about who runs the Executive Branch on a day to day basis. And I repeat, if Alexander Haig had left the "Constitutionally" out of his statement, he would not have obscured what he claimed.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. I think in the scenario you speak of, the Chief of Staff would be in charge

If the President or VP is absent, the Secretary of State has no authority to exercise the legal or constitutional powers of the Presidency (unless the Speaker and Pres Pro-Tem are also absent), as is true for the Chief of Staff. Generally it is assumed that the Chief of Staff as the closest advisor to the President would assume responsibility for executive business. However, he has no constitutional or legal authority and if he were to give any informal orders the people following those orders would be doing so on the assumption that he speaks for the President. The same would be true if anyone were to follow an informal order from the Secretary of State who had not officially assumed the powers of the President. It's all based on the idea that the President would want that said person be it the Secretary of State or more likely the Chief of Staff to assume responsibility for executive business in his absence.

[suston96]

13. The ranking cabinet member......

...would run the executive administration. Chief of Staff? Not unless it was John Spencer.

Of course, Haig could not do anything "constitutional". In any event, VP Bush was on his way back.

My remark was not about succession to the presidency. It was about chain of command in the executive branch. That means that the Speaker of the House and the Pres Pro Tem of the Senate are not included. Separation of powers, and all that.

[Hippo_Tron]

20. Yea, I realize you were talking about chain of command

I'm just not sure there's anything official that say that the VP and then the Secretary of State follow the President in the executive chain of command. I honestly think it depends on the President. Given Cheney's stature in the administration I'd be pretty certain that Bush has Cheney take over every time he steps out to go to the bathroom.

But lets take when Bush Senior was in office. I find it hard to believe that Poppy would ever let Dan Quayle get anywhere near making an executive decision if he could avoid it.

Yes, the West Wing portrays a particularly strong Chief of Staff but in real life the Chief of Staff is still responsible for managing the day to day business of the White House and formally is the closest advisor to the President. So it would make sense that he would continue to function in his role managing the White House in the absence of the President.

There's no reason that the Chief of Staff would all of a sudden start taking orders from the Secretary of State or a VP who wasn't acting President unless the President made it clear that one of those two would be in charge in his absence.

[suston96]

22. See my other reply....

....I hate these nested replies.

But go here: http://www.americanheritage.com/people/articles/web/20060330-ronald-reagan-washington-hilton-assassination-nancy-reagan-edwin-meese-james-brady-john-hinckley-jr-alexander-haig-brady-bill.shtml

There was no transfer of power per the Twenty Fifth. How could Reagan write a letter if he was unconscious?

It all actually went well and except for Haig misspeak about the Twenty Fifth, the event was one of chain of command - until VP Bush returned.

[Hippo_Tron]

23. I'm fully aware of the situation

Haig said "I'm in charge" and people followed him. The thing is that LEGALLY there is nothing that says Haig was in charge of executive business if the President and the VP aren't there. Haig's only legal authority was to run the State Department.

[Kingshakabobo]

11. But he DIDN'T leave out "constitutionally" so it's a moot point.

I agree with the rest of what you said but it IS rather scary to thing how ignorant he was regarding the order of constitutional succession - especially in his position at the height of the cold war.

[Lasher]

12. Close but no cigar

I appreciate the analogy but I must beg to differ with your discourse. To be fair you have been careful to point out that you are not labeling your scenarios as presidential succession, and rightly so. It is true that the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tem of the Senate do not scurry over to the west wing whenever the top two Executives are absent. Your example would be relevant when both the President and Vice President are on vacation, as an example. But the President was not on vacation. He was incapacitated and that should have triggered the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides for the situation where the President is temporarily disabled, such as if the President has a surgical procedure or becomes mentally unstable. And since the Vice President was temporarily unavailable at the time it is clear that the provisions of the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 should have been invoked.

So Haig was incorrect, whether he used the term "Constitutionally" or not. But he did use variations of the label at the time, and deliberately so, at least 3 times:

“So the ... helm is right here,” he said at the time. “And that means right in this chair for now, constitutionally, until the vice president gets here.”

<snip>

Haig answered the reporter: “Constitutionally gentlemen, you have the president, the vice president and the secretary of state, in that order, and should the president decide he wants to transfer the helm to the vice president, he will do so. As for now, I’m in control here, in the White House, pending the return of the vice president and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.”

<snip>

“You’d better read the Constitution,” Haig said to him. “We can get the vice president any time we want.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/04/23/60II/main287292.shtml

Another point to consider is the flagrant violation of the Constitution when Reagan continued to be incoherent for a period of time but power was not transferred to the Vice President. This was so that the manipulative Nancy Reagan could clutch at power.

[suston96]

14. As I said, Constitutionally.....

...Haig was incorrect.

Administratively, and de facto, he was "in charge here" at the White House.

It would have taken some time to crank in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Minutes? Hours? All those steps in the Twenth-Fifth, especially Section 4, take time. And....

....the Vice president was in an airplane and on his way back. The secretary of State was in the house - the White House - and he did what he should have done - take charge.

He wasn't doing any ridiculous power grab. He was a military man who knows the meaning of chain of command. Maybe he should have paid more attention to the Twenty-Fifth Amendment - you know, the one that practically no one understands, and next to the Twenty-Second, the stupidest amendment in the Constitution.

So stupid that it has given rise to a number of ludicrous movies and teleplays where the plots actually include a number of variations of that "power grab."

[Lasher]

19. The 25th Amendment does not specify a time delay or a process that could promote one

And as such the Speaker of the House was actually the President at that moment in time. Haig was not only incorrect, but a total idiot at the time. You are not correct to infer that practically no one understands the 25th Amendment - I find its stipulations quite clear and I am no mental giant. But even if you were right it would not excuse Haig for having been so ignorant of the stipulations of the Constitution and of the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. I can forgive the folks down at the local bar if they do not have an immediate grasp of these distinctions but none of them has so far accepted a position as Secretary of State.

By his behavior Haig showed that he is a total jackass, just like his hero Saint Ronnie of Reagan and all the rest of his cronies and their followers.

[suston96]

21. Uh, there is a problem....

...and that is why I said that the Twenty Fifth was bad.

What if the Vice-President is on a plane en route somewhere, and the President gets shot and unconscious...who writes the letter the Twenty Fifth instructs?

The Vice-President assumes the duties of the President immediately - and while Air Force 2 does a U-turn, the ranking officer in the White House is "in charge".

Go to Clause 6, Article I, and you will note the strained connection between the two instructions for the temporary assumption of the president's duties.

Meanwhile, Alexander Haig was right - he was in charge in the White House pending the return of Vice-President Bush.

In no way could the Congressional officers - the Speaker and the President-Pro-Tem become involved unless the Vice President was actually incapacitated.

An interesting question would be if there was actually a letter by Bush to the Congress as articulated by the Twenty Fifth upon his arrival at the White House where he, uh - relieved Alexander Haig.

Edited: No such letter. No transfer of power, it seems.
Here: http://www.americanheritage.com/people/articles/web/20060330-ronald-reagan-washington-hilton-assassination-nancy-reagan-edwin-meese-james-brady-john-hinckley-jr-alexander-haig-brady-bill.shtml

[Hippo_Tron]

25. There's nothing legally that says the Secretary of State was the ranking officer in the White House

The Secretary of State's job is to run the State Department, he is not in the White House chain of command.

[suston96]

26. Ranking member in the Executive present....

I cannot find any law or Executive Order that establishes such a "legal chain of command" but I believe the rankings of the cabinet officers suffice for the action that Haig took.

Haig was the ranking officer in the Executive Branch, which happens to have its Chief Executive offices in the White House. He was correct. Everybody else was gone. Maybe if he had said: "I dunno who is in charge." Then he would have been in serious trouble, since as the ranking cabinet member in the Executive Branch he should assume the responsibility of coordinating the immediate reactions to the attempted assassination. He did say that he was in contact with the Vice-President who was on his way back.

He did the right thing but said the wrong words.

[CTyankee]

15. Excellent information. You know your stuff and I thank you

DU is great for this. I'm sorry one person on this thread felt it necessary to be a bit petty, but you and others have provided a fine exposition of the issue. I learn a lot from folks like you!

[Lasher]

17. Aw shucks, wadn't nothin'

You're makin' me blush. :blush:

You might have already noticed but Hippo_Tron's views on the subject are worthy of attention.

[CTyankee]

18. Yep. I read Hip. Great stuff.

What's your read on the scary thing going around that Cheney will resign and Bush will appoint McCain as VP?

[Lasher]

30. That rumor's been going around in one form or another for awhile now

I don't think Lord Vader will voluntarily give up any power. He just loves it too much. But who can say for sure? Serving as VP for a couple of years might not make McCain more viable in 2008. I, for one, like him less as I get to know more about him.

[HamdenRice]

6. Oh, brother

Why is it so difficult to educate DUers on presidential succession????

Please see this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2874036&mesg_id=2874036

[Lasher]

7. Good thread over there.

An important thing to consider in the application of the 25th Amendment in Gerald Ford's case is that a deal was being brokered to get Nixon to resign. Ford was acceptable to most in the Democratically controlled Congress and his nomination was quickly confirmed.

If Junior were impeached, Lord Vader would become President and nominate a VP. With no compromises being made to get Junior to voluntarily resign, Congress might not feel obliged to quickly confirm Cheney's nomination. In that case, don't you think Pelosi would become Vice President as provided by the Presidential Succession Act of 1947?

[Hippo_Tron]

10. She would be first in line but she would not assume the office of the Vice Presidency

If there was a vacant VP slot and nobody was confirmed the Speaker of the House would simply remain as first in line to succeed the President and the Vice Presidency would remain vacant.

Initially there was no procedure for filling the VP slot because constitutionally it's not a particularly important job and has become even less so as the Senate has made the President of the Senate role merely a ceremonial post.

[Lasher]

16. Absolutely correct Hippo, thanks for the correction

She would not be VP but would be first in line. To some that might seem an unimportant distinction but I know it is not. For me this is one of the more useful discussions that occur here and I appreciate your contributions to it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

29. I'm Not Sure Why You Are Acting So Smug When You're Not In The Right.

The OP asked a very straightforward question about succession. They didn't mention anything about impeachment; just succession.

You're tirade is about impeachment. In the case of succession, if the Pres and Vice Pres were incapacitated, Nancy Pelosi would in fact be Pres, or if she was incapacitated as well then Byrd would most likely be.

Not sure why you gave the attitude you did, when you completely twisted the OP to be about impeachment when it was about succession.

[CTyankee]

31. Thank you for your support

I must say I was surprised by such a response. I don't know much on this issue and I wanted to learn more. I'm not uneducated but I am the first to admit it when I don't have enough information.

[HamdenRice]

32. It would take a catastrophe for this to be relevant

The point is that there are many, many OPs and threads that assume that if Bush and Cheney are removed or resign, Nancy Pelosi is going to be president. That is almost impossible. For the president pro tem to become president is even more impossible.

The order of succession, as opposed to the 25th amendment, was designed to operate in a disaster -- the assassination of the entire leadership, a nuclear bomb over washington or some such event.

The OP was one of those posts. Various posters try to correct this everytime it comes up, but DUers seem resistant to learning this basic constitutional fact.

As for not being in the right, no you are not correct.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

33. Please Directly Answer This Question:

In context of the Order Of Succession, does the president pro-tem of the senate come after the speaker of the house?

If the answer is yes, than you were not in the right to twist the OP into something it wasn't, just for sake of stroking ego by providing facts that nobody asked for while using a condescending tone.

The OP asked for a straightforward answer of confirmation as to whether the president pro-tem comes after the speaker of the house in the line of succession. They did not ask about anything dealing with impeachment. Since the question was in fact legitimate, the condescending tone you used in your reply was in fact unwarranted and not in the right. In fact, the entire thing was of the wrong context completely since it was geared towards a different topic altogether and was contradictory to the premise of this thread asking for a straightforward succession confirmation. Sorry. :hi:

[Jack Rabbit]

24. Your spuse correct about the line of succession

Traditionally, the post of Senate President Pro Tem goes to the senior member of the majority party. More than once the position was occupied by a Senator over the age of 90.

The senior Democrat in the Senate is Robert Byrd.

[CTyankee]

27. Well, this seems to be a problem. Why have it if we have a

Senate member who is so old? It seems self defeating!

I am getting a little confused by this whole thing. The amendment seems to say one thing and the Constitution another.

The oldest guy in the Senate is a pretty weird solution to this problem, altho I guess it didn't start out this way.

[Jack Rabbit]

28. The Speaker of the House has never succeeded to the presidency (yet)

So no one is really concerned about it.

One of the reasons for the 25th Amendment was, in the wake of the assassination of President Kennedy, the Speaker was next in line to be president since at that time the office of the Vice President remained vacant if the VP succeeded. The Speaker at the time was John McCormack of Massachusetts. He was over seventy and never had any desire to be president. "Every night before I go to bed," said Speaker McCormack, "I pray for Lyndon Johnson's health,"