Who should the House select to succeed Chimpy after impeachment?

[kay1864]

Poll question: Who should the House select to succeed Chimpy after impeachment?

Let's assume that we win the House Nov 7 (and heck, the Senate too). Let's also assume that Congress impeaches Cheney first, then impeaches Chimpy before a VP replacement is confirmed (said confirmation requires approval of both the Senate and House). Under the Constitution, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would then automatically become President. But is she the best choice?

Note that the question is "who should the House select", NOT "who do you think should succeed Chimpy". Subtle difference. The House has to select someone who will work well with the House and Senate, and lead the American people.

For the purposes of this poll, I'm assuming the Speaker would have to come from heads of standing House Committees. And since DU's polls are limited to ten choices, I'm going with House members from larger states, and the more powerful committees. Feel free to name an alternate.

[The Deacon]

1. Nancy Pelosi Would Be "Acting President" Until A Special Election Could Be

Held - no one but the Vice President becomes President.

[kay1864]

2. Nope.

Little something called the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. Also, no provision in the Constitution for such a special election. House Speaker would be President until Jan 20, 2009.

[The Deacon]

5. You Forgot The Twenty-Fifth Admendment

Which specifies that the Vice President BECOMES President and the others ACT AS PRESIDENT.
This came up because Kissinger & Albright were not "Natural Born Citizens" so, under the 25th Admendment would they be eligible to serve as "Acting President."

[kay1864]

9. Nope, didn't forget it at all

My "Nope" above referred to your "special election". The Speaker would serve the remainder of the current term. Hence until Jan 20, 2009. No such thing as a special election for President.

[zeemike]

3. Nancy Pelosi is good....she deserves it

But Conyers would be so satisfying too.
And I guess poetic justice would dictate that Edward Kennedy should get it, but I don't want any more shooting.

[kay1864]

4. Ted Kennedy is a Senator, not a House member

[zeemike]

6. Oh right ...but poetic license can go that far.n/t

[liberalmuse]

7. When they Impeach, they must Impeach Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld AND Rice...

There cannot be any possibility of Dr. Evil assuming the helm. Dear GOD.

[kay1864]

8. Not if we win the House (one of the assumptions above)

Rumsfeld and Rice are below the House Speaker in succession. And they'll be out the door minutes after the Speaker takes the oath of office.

[Hugin]

10. Nancy would be my choice...

If only for awhile, until the dust settles and Hannity is babbling on a street corner
somewhere.

[kay1864]

11. Well, it wouldn't be for "awhile"....

It would be almost two years (assuming the Democratic Congress acts fairly quickly). It's not a stopgap measure--the Speaker stays in office until after the 2008 election.

[Hugin]

18. Heck, I might even vote to keep Nancy there after that.

Depending on the breaks.

[kay1864]

19. Oh that phrase....

"Depending on the breaks" makes me think of George C. Scott in Dr. Strangelove. So you made me smile! :)

[onenote]

12. reality check

First, no one is being removed from office unless 2/3 of the Senate is going to vote to do so, which means a massive defection of repubs that is pretty difficult to imagine in the real world. Even assuming such a defection was going to occur, then what would happen is that there would be a negotiation between and among the repubs and Democrats whereby Cheney would resign, a new VP would be nominated and confirmed (McCain?) and then chimpy would resign, at which point McCain would ascend to the presidency and he would nominate a Democrat to be VP. That is the simple political reality of what would happen.

I should add that there is an interesting and arguably unresolved issue raised by the 25th Amendment and the Presidential succession Act: if in fact chimpy and cheney were removed and the Speaker ascended to the presidency, would the acting president still be required to nominate someone to fill the VP vacancy and if that person was confirmed and there was a VP, would that person then ascend to the presidency in place of the Speaker? I think the answer is: yes a VP would be nominated, but no that person wouldn't become president unless the acting president stepped down.

[kay1864]

13. Well of course

However, this is another reality: The House can hold up a VP nomination, but the Senate (esp. one controlled by the Dems) cannot hold up voting on impeachment already passed to them by the House.

Also, only 17 Republican Senators (out of 49) would be needed to remove both from office, under the original scenario.

So then you have 32 or more Republican Senators voting against conviction of an extremely unpopular pResident who has committed known felonies. And then those same Republican Senators have to face their constituents, that they kept Chimpy in office.

Another reality: Cheney will never ever resign, certainly not under pressure from Congress.


(saw your edit about the 25th after I wrote my reply. I agree with you--new VP would not ascend to Presidency. Fascinating Constitutional question though. Let's hope it wouldn't end up in the :puke: Supreme Court)

[onenote]

14. I don't disagree with anything you say

But I'm extremely dubious about siphoning off 17 repub senators unless there is such an overwhelming outcry in the country for chimpy's head that a majority of the senate repubs feel compelled to seek his removal, in which case I think they could/would prevail on him to resign as part of a deal that resulted in a caretaker repub president for the remainder of his term, with a Democrat as VP, in order to avoid the constitutional crisis that the situation would otherwise be portrayed as creating.

[kay1864]

16. Yes, it's definitely a hopeful scenario....

Please note however, that 17 would not be a 'majority' of the 49 Senate Repubs.

And I don't think Chimpy would resign either. He'd rather take his chances with a Senate vote.

But I agree that a caretaker GOP President and a Dem VP is a deal that Senate Repubs might go for, to avoid Pelosi (or whoever) as President. Under that scenario, the Senate Repubs would pressure the House (GOP and Dems) to confirm a GOP VP (who would become the caretaker President), in return for convicting Chimpy.

Not that those Senate Repubs could be counted on to keep up their end of the bargain, of course... :eyes:

[SheilaT]

15. Let's assume

nothing. You're building a house of cards. Besides, no one here is actually going to be in Congress, so none of us will be actually doing any selecting.

And at the risk of being flamed, I'm really bothered by all this happy assuming we're going to take control of both Houses. It's not a foregone conclusion. And too many Dems who will be re-elected have voted along with the Republicans on too many issues for me to trust them to be willing to do anything as wild-eyed radical as impeachment. In a nutshell, they're cowards. Won't happen.

[kay1864]

17. Geez Louise, it's a *scenario*

Not a "house of cards".

Fact: If we win the House (and esp. if we also win the Senate), there will be rampant speculation about impeachment. In the MSM. And here in DU.

Fact: I'm not "assuming we're going to take control of both Houses". Or that it's a "foregone conclusion". It's a long battle. However (another fact) it is a conclusion that's about 50-50 right now. Not an uphill battle. Just a difficult one, and one we need to win.

Fact: When over half the American people agree that Chimpy should be impeached, it's no longer a wild-eyed radical idea.

Fact: This is a DU poll, not a poll of members of Congress.

[SheilaT]

20. I'm sorry, but

I just don't like seeing people getting all starry eyed about how we're going to take back Congress this year. Two years ago Bush's popularity was just below 50%. Prior to the invasion of Iraq a majority of Americans opposed the war.

And yeah, this may be a DU poll, but it's expressed as if we'd be the ones choosing the next Speaker of the House. In short, you're counting a lot of chickens before any eggs have been laid, let alone hatched.

If, if, if. I think you underestimate how determined this administration is to hanging on to power.

[kay1864]

21. Would you please READ the OP before replying?

Nowhere is my post "starry-eyed". And nowhere did I imply that "we'd be the ones" choosing the Speaker. It's an opinion poll. A *DU* opinion poll.

Sheesh.

[SheilaT]

22. I did read it.

And I still think it's stupid and unrealistic and pointless. And it's getting way, way ahead of ourselves. I remember DUers dreaming over who should be in Wesley Clark's cabinet, long before we knew the nominee was going to be Kerry. And then of course, endless speculations about Kerry's cabinet. It's the kind of thing that makes us look foolish to others, and gives freepers lots of ammunition against us.

[kay1864]

23. Gee, what a nice thing for you to say.

It's the kind of thing that makes us look foolish to others, and gives freepers lots of ammunition against us.

[SheilaT]

24. Unfortunately,

it does.