Is this possible?
- Wrap10
-
Brian Tubbs
- animalspirit
- Mugwump53
- animalspirit
- Mugwump53
- animalspirit
- Wrap10
- ossining
- ossining
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
» Wrap10 - President to Vice President?
Hi John,Have you been watching any of the History Channel series on the presidents this week? I've only caught a portion so far but it seems pretty good.
Anyway, for some strange reason I got to wondering about this question the other day - could a two-term president ever be elected to the office of vice president after having served as president? On the surface it seems like the answer should be no, but when I think about it a bit I'm not completely sure. So I thought I come here and ask the Wise and Noble Scribe himself!
-- posted by Wrap10
»
Brian Tubbs
- Re: President to Vice President?
Well, in the absence of the "Wise and Noble Scribe" 
, I'll take my shot at this. I would say that a definitive opinion from the Supreme Court would be needed, as they would probably look at similar laws, statutes, precedents for a more authoritative interpretation. But, failing that....
My answer would be "Yes," BUT...
Per the 22nd Amendment, the individual would only be able to serve as President for a maximum of two years, if the President were to resign or die.
According to the 22nd Amendment, a President may serve a maximum of 10 years (two 4-year terms plus two years, if he/she assumes the presidency on the death or resignation of a President - meaning if they came into the office as a VP).
So, legally, an ex-President who served two 4-year terms (someone like Bill Clinton) would definitely be constitutionally eligible to serve as Vice-President, since he/she could stand in as President, if needed, for two years.
That's my take on it, but the Supreme Court might disagree.
-- posted by Brian Tubbs
» animalspirit - Eligibility
In response to Re: President to Vice President? posted by BrianTubbs:Taking the opening sentence of the 22nd amendment as the operative language:
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....Given the subsequent operative language of the twenty-fifth amendment I take it that Bill Clinton, say, is ineligible to run for Vice President since he is ineligible to run for President and you must be eligible to run for President to run for Vice President BUT given the two year-limit once half of a presidential term passes Clinton then becomes eligible to be APPOINTED Vice President and subsequently serve as President for the rest of the term.
In other words, I think there is a loop-hole where two-term Presidents become eligible to be appointed as Vice President and serve as President during the second half of each subsequent presidential term for the rest of their lives until such time as they serve out their remaining two-year eligibility.
This is strictly on the basis of my reading of the language, I'm not aware if the Courts have weighed in on this.
-- posted by animalspirit
» Mugwump53 - Re: Eligibility
In response to Eligibility posted by RussHicks:The 22nd Amendment says only that a person cannot be elected PRESIDENT more than twice (and only once if he is a VP who serves more than half of another president's term). It sets no limits to being elected VP.
A former two-term President could run for VP as often as he wants. If he moved up to the Presidency for any reason, he would finish the term, but he would be a lame duck who could not run for re-election. He could then be re-elected VP yet again, and for as many times as the people will have him.
Bill Clinton and George W. Bush could run for VP on their respective parties' tickets, and they could serve all of the remaining portion of the term if their president died or resigned, or was impeached and removed from office, a possibility that must be considered when talking about Clinton. {G}
In fact, having an experienced, successful and popular former-president running for VP could be a very positive factor. Who can deny that Clinton or Bush are capable of taking over and filling in for a fallen (or removed) president? That would end the usual problem of a VP candidate's ability to be president being questioned. Of course, a presidential candidate might well be worried about their VP overshadowing them.
-- posted by Mugwump53
» animalspirit - Abolish the 22nd Amendment!
In response to Re: Eligibility posted by Mugwump53:It's what comes after the part of the two-election limit which makes me maintain my silly idea that the 22nd Amendment prohibits Clinton from assuming the presidency prior to January 20, 2007 but not afterwards:
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.Since Clinton has been elected more than once he is by definition ineligible to SERVE as President for more than two more years and thus ineligible to SERVE as Vice President at any time prior to January 20, 2007.
I see it more as a "forced reading" of the language to infer chronological sequence of having served another's term BEFORE being elected twice. I read the language as having summed up a person's lifetime tenure with "shall be elected" effectively meaning the same as "shall have been elected" once all is said and done.
-- posted by animalspirit
» Mugwump53 - Re: Abolish the 22nd Amendment!
In response to Abolish the 22nd Amendment! posted by RussHicks:Hi, Russ.
The 22nd Amendment limits elections to the presidency; it says nothing about how much time a person may serve.
Clinton would not be ineligible ro serve, only ineligible to be elected (as president). The portion of the 22nd Amendment you quoted was the end of the sentence on VP's who moved up to finish the term of the elected president. Regardless, it is a limit on being ELECTED president, not SERVING as president.
There is no stated limit on being elected VP, and no matter how many times a person has been elected president, they can be elected VP as many times as the people will vote for them (or more accurately and specifically, as many times as the electors will vote for them).
"Since Clinton has been elected more than once he is by definition ineligible to SERVE as President for more than two more years and thus ineligible to SERVE as Vice President at any time prior to January 20, 2007"
Since Clinton has been elected more than once, he is ineligible to be elected. There is no restriction on serving; you said that, not the Constitution. So he can be a full term VP as many times as he can get elected, and he can finish an unlimited number of terms of presidents who die, resign or are impeached and removed from office.
-- posted by Mugwump53
» animalspirit - To Elect and to Serve
In response to Re: Abolish the 22nd Amendment! posted by Mugwump53:Hi, John.
"The 22nd Amendment limits elections to the presidency; it says nothing about how much time a person may serve."
As I read it, half of this component -
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- concerns "how much time a person may serve" - the two year limit of another's term COMBINED with being elected more than once.
Isn't this the Constitution saying there is a restriction on serving?
I read this as the disqualifying prospective combination which makes Clinton ineligible to serve as either Vice President or President in circumstances of more than two years.
How can someone already elected more than once such as Clinton be elected to serve as Vice President when as such he would be subject to assuming the presidency with more than two years of a term remaining?
A circumstance expressly prohibited by the Constitution?
Under my reading this in of itself is sufficient disqualification without having to invoke the Twelfth Amendment:
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
-- posted by animalspirit
» Wrap10 - Re: To Elect and to Serve
In response to To Elect and to Serve posted by RussHicks:Thanks for the responses guys. I didn't realize it would generate this much debate. Kind of an interesting subject though.
Just out of curiosity, what does everyone think of the 22nd Amendment? Do you think term limits on the presidency like that is a good idea?
-- posted by Wrap10
» ossining - The 1980 GOP Dream Ticket
Hi John,I wanted to get your take on what would have been the GOP dream ticket of former president Gerald R. Ford joining the Reagan ticket. There was serious talk of such a pairing, but the talks fell through and Reagan eventually turned to George H.W. Bush.
Look (back) into your crystal ball, when we were all a lot younger and had more hair, and tell me what you think would have happened with a Reagan-Ford campaign and administration.
-- posted by ossining
» ossining - While we're on the subject...
I have another question for you, John. Recently discovered handwritten letters of Harry Truman's revealed that he was willing to be #2 on an Eisenhower Democratic ticket in '48. I would love to know your thoughts on this pairing as well.-- posted by ossining
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.