We Need To Reconsider Presidential Succession
The following thoughts are ones I’ve posted about before but since I still think it is an important issue I am going to repost it about once a year in the hopes that someone in power will take it under consideration. While it is not a pleasant thought I do think that this is an important subject to be addressed given the world in which we now live.
Under the terms of the 1947 act if there is no President or Vice President the office next passes to the Speaker of the House, then the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and finally through the Cabinet in order of the date of creation of the Department.
Now to begin with I have to take some exception with including the members of Congress in the line. I understand that there was some logic in including elected officials rather than appointed ones, but the Speaker is only elected by the voters of one Congressional District out of 435.
Also I see the Cabinet members as perhaps better suited to serve as President since they are executive officers rather than legislative officials. In addition they often reflect the views of the President more closely and since the voters selected him to lead, his or her views should prevail.
But I am realistic to the idea that if Congress is involved that they are going to put their stamp on things and can understand people wanting someone selected by voters serving.
But the next problem is not one I think we can continue to ignore. After the Speaker of the House the next person to serve is the President Pro Tempore of the Senate. This post is currently held by 93 year old Robert Byrd of West Virginia. If the Republicans were in charge the post would be occupied by 78 year old Richard Lugar of Indiana
I have nothing against the elderly and know many senior citizens who have done some truly great things. But if we are dealing with a major crisis that resulted in the death of the President, the Vice President and the Speaker of the House I am not sure we would want someone in their 80’s or 90’s to take over. The stress of such a situation is one that would tax a much younger man.
Obviously when this law was passed it was assumed that it would be very unlikely for even the Speaker to serve, but today that is no longer as certain. It’s still an improbable situation that the President, Vice President and Speaker would all be taken out of line at the same time. But in a world of terror it is not quite as unreal.
In the event of such a horrible event we need to have someone younger and ready to serve. I would personally prefer to remove any members of Congress from the line, but if we need to have a Senator I would prefer to see someone like the Majority Leader serve.
Or failing that we need to see the Senate change their rules and choose someone else for the post of President Pro Tempore. Currently it goes to the senior member of the majority party, but perhaps they could recognize that it a possible successor and choose someone more appropriate.
When Hubert Humphrey rejoined the Senate they created for him the post of President Pro Tempore Emeritus, an honorary position. They could revive this post for the senior member of the majority party and then select someone more appropriate for the PPT post.
I’m told that on occasion members of Congress surf by our little site. If someone happens to see this post, I’d love to see you do something about this problem.
10 Responses to “We Need To Reconsider Presidential Succession”
Given the collection of tax cheats, self-described Marxists, and major incompetents running about in this administration I should be relieved if Robert Byrd wound up with the Presidency in the event of such a major attack. At least he was elected by voters and while I might strongly disagree with him on issues, I have no doubts about his love for and allegiance to America.
I would think that some of the rationale for having the PPT in the line is that it would devolve on a very senior level politician with limited long term political ambitions.
The Speaker only represents one district as a Congressional rep, but as Speaker she also represents the majority of the House which elected her speaker.
Any attempt to change Succession is bound to open a can of political worms. And I'm not sure I see a clearly better plan being proposed. Sometimes it is best to let a sleeping dog lie, even if it has fleas. Especially if it has fleas.
I completely agree….the House is full of loons…the Senate Majority Leader should be 3rd in line…then maybe the minority leader. We shouldn't consider the House until everyone in the Senate is dead.
I was watching the games this weekend and saw Obama and Biden at the GT game and got a little worried…
Correct me on my history if I am wrong…but I believe when the succession was setup, the Senate was appointed by States, not elected. So I understand why it made since to look to the House. That has since changed and maybe we should do what is best for our country and look to the Senate. That being said…we have more important things going on right now
We must be approaching real and meaningful health care reform because every time we do, some opinon article like this one shows up printed on the special stationary that has Obama's death depicted on it in a watermark. You know, if you hold it up to the light just so, you can see it.
Every time things got seriously close to real reform before we'd have paid industry goons showing up at rallies with loaded sidearms strapped to their sides, astroturfers posing as real people. Then came the poster of Obama as the now-deceased “Joker” from the latest batman movie. Now we have this article nonchalantly discussing who we need to insert if Obama dies.
So thanks for the litmus update MedMob. I guess the dems really are getting serious about passing something for all? Cool.
A couple of comments
The current law was written in 1947, long after Senators were elected. Prior to that for about 60 years the succession went through the Cabinet w/o the Congress being involved. Personally I'd prefer it to go that way but if we need to have it through Congress we need someone better 3rd in line.
As to the comments on Obama and the digs at me, I first wrote this post several years ago when Bush was President so it's hardly partisan. The simple fact is we live in a world where a terrorist attack is, if unlikely, possible and we need to be prepared.
How health care comes into it I'm not sure.
I'm not sure what comments you are referring to but I just disagree with you on this one, there were no 'digs at' you that I can see. And vis-a-vis partisanship I complimented Byrd and defended Pelosi being near the top of the line. Which is not exactly where my partisan sympathies lie.
And here we have a moment in which shannonlee actually agreed with me on some points; how nonpartisan can you get? I was planning to burn incense on my home altar in celebration.
Nor did I think you were being anything but polite.
No I don't think we should change anything. Just add sequestering the republicans under machine gun guards in a room with no outside contact should anything ever happen to our executive leadership. The senior democrat will then lead.
“collection of tax cheats, self-described Marxists, and major incompetents running about in this administration”
“the House is full of loons”
(Hence, the Massachusetts election results, as well as what the public has been saying all year)
I agree. It's time to give more weight to the Senate; it doesn't have enough when it comes to this issue. Remedial action to improve the chances of adults being in charge, at least after a tragedy, would be welcome.
Thanks…I shouldn't be so lazy next time.