The secretaries of newly-created cabinet-level departments are not automatically included in the order of succession; this is normally accomplished by an appropriate provision in the legislation authorizing the new department. These two th Congress bills had a direct purpose: to include the Secretary of DHS in the line of presidential succession. In this position, the secretary would have been eighth in line to succeed the President, rather than 18th, at the end of the order, following the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
This realignment would have had historical significance, as the four offices that would immediately precede the Secretary of Homeland Security constitute the original cabinet, as established between and during the presidency of George Washington, sometimes referred to as the "big four. This departure from tradition derived from heightened concern over the question of continuity of government. Both its size and crucial role are cited as arguments for placing the Secretary of DHS high in the order of succession.
Second, the Secretary of Homeland Security would have critically important responsibilities in these areas, and might be expected to possess the relevant knowledge and expertise that arguably justify placing this official ahead of 10 secretaries of more senior departments, particularly in the event an unprecedented disaster were to befall the leadership of the executive branch.
On the other hand, the bill was open to criticism on the argument that was an exercise in undue alarmism, and that placing the Secretary of Homeland Security ahead of the secretaries of more senior departments might set a questionable precedent, by seeming to elevate the office to a sort of "super cabinet" level that would arguably be inconsistent with its legal status.
Introduced on January 13, , and passed the Senate on June 27, , without amendment, by unanimous consent. It was later received in the House, and referred to Subcommittee on the Constitution of the House Judiciary Committee. Revisiting the Succession Act of Several other bills introduced in the th Congress called for substantive changes in the order of succession beyond the Vice President.
Some of the concerns expressed by critics of the Act were reflected in these proposals, which are listed by chamber and in order of introduction, and are examined below. Section 2 of H. First, it clarified existing language in the Act by changing the language concerning referring to succession from "the Speaker of the House of Representatives" and the "President pro tempore of the Senate" to "the person holding the office of Speaker of the House of Representatives at the time such event, inability, or failure occurs" and "the person holding the office of President pro tempore at such time.
Second, it sought to amend 3 U. In other words, a cabinet officer acting as President would not be displaced by a newly qualified Speaker of the House, or a newly qualified President Pro Tempore. If, however, the officer's service is based on the inability of the President or Vice President, then the officer would be superseded by the removal of the disability of the President or Vice President. This provision addressed several of the issues cited earlier in this report that have been noted by critics of the Succession Act of First, by eliminating the displacement of a cabinet officer acting as President, except in cases of presidential or vice presidential inability, it would remove a potential source of instability: once installed as acting President, the cabinet officer would remain in this position for the balance of the presidential term, unless, as noted above, the officer is acting due to the presumably temporary inability of the President or Vice President.
Further, under these circumstances it would almost certainly remove the possibility of a President and Vice President being succeeded by an acting President of a different party, which has proved to be an issue of continuing concern since passage of the Succession Act of This would, some suggest, provide a presumably experienced executive who would act as President.
On the other hand, some might argue that continuing a cabinet officer as acting President after a Speaker or President Pro Tempore had qualified would violate the original intention of the Succession Act, which was to ensure that elected rather than appointed officers would succeed to the presidency.
It can be further argued that experience as a Member of either house of Congress and service as Speaker or President Pro Tempore would not necessarily be inconsistent with executive experience and ability. Section 3 proposed to change the current provisions of 3 U. Instead, such officers would not automatically resign if they were acting due "in whole or in part" to the "inability of the President or the Vice President.
Section 4 was a technical adjustment to 3 U. No further action was taken on this proposal. It sought to empower the President to choose an officer among specified congressional leadership positions who would be designated to succeed in case of simultaneous vacancies, disqualifications, or inability in the offices of President and Vice President.
This would have had the effect of eliminating the possibility that a President and Vice President would be succeeded by congressional leaders of a different party than their own. At the same time, the bill would have continued the tradition established by the Succession Act of that elected, rather than appointed officials, i. Under the bill's provisions, the President was to submit to the Clerk of the House of Representatives his choice of either the office of the Speaker, or the office of the minority leader as designated primary office of succession.
Similarly, the President would submit to the Secretary of the Senate his designation of the office of majority or minority leader of the Senate as the secondary successor under the act. Thus, the President would have the option of choosing a member of his own political party as his potential successor under such circumstances.
This section of the bill dealing with the Senate contained a further significant change from existing procedures in that it sought to establish the person holding the office of majority or minority leader of the Senate, rather than the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, as secondary successor.
The intention here was arguably that this change would place a younger and perhaps more vigorous Senator of the President's party in line of succession, rather than the President Pro Tempore, who is customarily the senior Senator of the majority party.
In common with the bill's House-related provisions, it would also have ensured that the President and Vice President would be succeeded temporarily or permanently, depending on conditions, by a member of the political party of their choosing. This would safeguard party continuity in the presidency, but would not assure it, since a President would be free to choose from among both parties. It is arguable that a President might choose a House or Senate officer from a party other than his own as a demonstration of bipartisanship.
A question could be raised, however, as to the constitutional status of the House minority leader and the majority and minority leaders of the Senate. Are these officials "officers" of Congress? While a change in House and Senate rules to establish these positions as offices would appear to eliminate this hurdle, the perennial question would remain as to whether any officers of Congress are eligible to succeed under the Constitution.
In common with H. In case of the former, then the acting President would serve only until the disability of the President or Vice President was removed. In case of the latter contingency, he would serve until a President or Vice President qualifies. No further action was taken on the proposal during the th Congress. These resolutions, introduced respectively by Representative Brad Sherman, on September 14, , and Senators John Cornyn and Trent Lott on February 12, , addressed the desirability, from the standpoint of continuity of government, of having the officers comprising a President-elect's line of succession confirmed and in place by the time of the inauguration.
They recommended that a President whose term is coming to an end, and who will not succeed himself, should submit his successor's nominations for offices that fall within the line of succession to the Senate for its consideration before his term ends.
They further recommended that the confirmation process for such officers should be completed by the Senate, insofar as possible, between January 3, the date on which the new Congress assembles, unless otherwise arranged, and January 20, the date on which the incumbent President's term ends. Finally they urged the incumbent President to sign and deliver commissions for those officers whose nominations have been approved on January 20, so that they will be in place when the President-elect is nominated.
Traditionally, Presidents-elect announce their Cabinet choices during the transition period that normally takes place between election day and January 20 of the following year, when the newly-elected President actually assumes office. Also during this period, incumbent Presidents' cabinet officers traditionally submit their resignations, generally effective on inauguration day. Although investigations of and hearings on cabinet nominees for an incoming administration are often under way before the changeover, official nominations by a new President, and subsequent advice and consent by the Senate, cannot occur until after the new President has assumed office.
Frequently, this process continues for some weeks, or longer in the case of controversial or contested nominations, so that the full Cabinet may not be sworn until well after the inauguration. Representative Sherman, Senators Cornyn and Lott and other observers viewed this gap, particularly in the confirmation and swearing-in of cabinet officers included in the line of succession, as a threat to continuity in both the presidency and in executive branch management.
One advantage conferred by this proposal was that cabinet secretaries, unlike elected officials, do not serve set terms of office which expire on a date certain.
If the level of interpersonal and bipartisan cooperation envisaged in the resolution could be attained, an incoming President might assume office on January 20 with a full Cabinet already sworn and installed, thus reducing the potential for disruption of the executive branch by a terrorist attack. The process recommended by H. They would make it more likely that every incoming President would have a cabinet nominated, vetted, and sworn on January In addition to the national security-related advantage this would confer, it would arguably provide an impetus to streamlining the sometimes lengthy and contentious transition and appointments process faced by all incoming administrations.
It would also, however, face substantial obstacles. It would require high levels of good will and cooperation between incumbent Presidents and their successors. Moreover, it would impose a sizeable volume of confirmation-related business on both the lame duck and newly-sworn Congresses during the 10 weeks following a presidential election.
During this period, the expiring Congress traditionally adjourns sine die, while the new Congress generally performs only internal business and counts the electoral votes between its own installation on January 3 and the presidential inauguration. No further action was taken on either resolution. No further action was taken on. Section 1 established the title. Section 2 a repealed subsections a , b , and c of Section 19 of Title 3 of the U. This eliminated any role for the Speaker and President Pro Tempore in presidential succession.
Succession in cases of the death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify would pass directly to cabinet officers in the order in which their departments were created.
Section 2 b inserted the Secretary of Homeland Security in the order of succession directly following the Attorney General. It also repealed the "bumping" or supplantation procedure, except in cases of disability of both the President and Vice President, and states that service as acting President by a cabinet officer does not require the officer's resignation from his departmental post.
Section 2 c provided for succession in the event that an Acting President "shall die, resign, or be removed It also confirmed potential Acting Presidents must: 1 meet constitutional qualifications for the presidency; 2 have been confirmed by the Senate in their cabinet position; and 3 not be under impeachment by the House of Representatives at the time they accede to the office.
This bill met many of the objections to the Succession Act of offered by the acts's critics by providing for cabinet succession, and eliminating both bumping except in cases of presidential and vice presidential disability and the automatic resignation provision imposed by current law on any cabinet officer who assumes the acting presidency.
Section 3 allows for a President to communicate a disability to Congress and it has been done several times when Presidents have undergone routine medical procedures. Under Section 3, the Vice President temporarily acts as President. Section 4 deals with a different scenario — when a President is unable or unwilling to communicate a disability. Under Section 4, the Vice President, either acting with the Cabinet or a group designated by Congress, can declare the President disabled.
Certainly, one potential constitutional crisis would be the lack of a Vice President in office to start a Section 4 disability review of a President. Another is the lack of a constitutional or legal precedent for someone to act as a temporary Vice President, to start the Section 4 review process.
Clearly, the constitutional role of the Vice President has expanded since , and it seems unlikely that the position would remain vacant for long in the era after the 25th amendment was ratified.
The 25th Amendment, proposed by Congress and ratified by the states in the aftermath of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, provides the procedures for replacing the president or vice president in the event of death, removal, resignation, or incapacitation. The Watergate scandal of the s saw the application of these procedures, first when Gerald Ford replaced Spiro Agnew as vice president, then when he replaced Richard Nixon as president, and then when Nelson Rockefeller filled the resulting vacancy to become the vice president.
Read more from the Congressional Research Service here We saw the first application of this amendment in , when Richard M. Nixon nominated Gerald R. Ford then ascended to the Presidency in , after the resignation of President Nixon. Interestingly, this resulted in an administration where neither the President nor the Vice President were actually elected to either office. Answer: Presidents get to fill thousands of jobs when they assume office, but the most focus is on the nominations of Cabinet Secretaries, like the Defense Secretary or the Attorney General.
These are influential jobs, as these individuals make policy decisions and run government departments with substantial powers.
0コメント