Would Hillary be allowed to pick Bill as her VP candidate?
If it weren't for the foaming-at-the-mouth crowd who cry "he lied!" all the time, I figure Hillary would be a shoe-in if she'd just say "I plan to listen to what Bill tells me." I know there'd be trouble over the succession if she made Bill VP, but is that even allowed?
March 10th, 2007 3:04am
A person that has served as a President or Vice President is not allowed to serve in any government capacity afterwards, IIRC.
March 10th, 2007 5:19am
Flasher, IMO you're mistaken about that.
"Notable examples of significant post-presidential careers include William Howard Taft's tenure as Chief Justice of the United States, Herbert Hoover's work on government reorganization after World War II, Jimmy Carter's career as a global human rights campaigner and best-selling writer, and most recently George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton's combined effort to appeal for donations from Americans after the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Other former presidents have served in elected office after leaving the White House; Andrew Johnson was elected to the Senate after his term was over, and John Quincy Adams served in the House of Representatives. Grover Cleveland, whose bid for reelection failed in 1888, was elected president again four years later in 1892. John Tyler served in the provisional Confederate States Congress during the Civil War, and was elected to the official Confederate Congress but died before it convened."
Hmm. Maybe not the same branch of government then?
I'm fairly sure there's some statute prohibiting Bill from taking the VP slot.
March 10th, 2007 7:05am
I belive he can serve as VP, but he would not be in the line of succession. You may be referring to the 12th amendment, which says "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States". Since Bill was not impeached (and thus not convicted of a major crime), he would technically still be eligible for being VP.
However, since he's already had his 2 terms as President under the 22nd amendment. Under the terms of the 25th amendment and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, however, he would not be in the line of succession. The office would skip him and go to the Speaker of the House.
There may be some debate over this, as the 22nd amendment says "elected", and if Hillary became unable to fulfill the duties of the office, he might still become President again because he would be "become" President.
March 10th, 2007 7:18am
The 12th Amendment says that no person "constitutionally" ineligible to be President, may be Vice-President.
What is the meaning of the word "constitutionally"? Some of my political opponents would have you believe it refers to the current US Constitution, as amended by the 22nd Amendment (with the the 2 term limit on Presidency).
However if you think about it for a moment, clearly it the 1 th Amendment must refers to the original US Constitution (which had qualifications of age, residency, etc.), or the Constitution at the time of the 12th Amendment (which had the same qualifications as the original Constitution). It simply can not refer to the Constitution as subsequently amended.
The 12th Amendment was ratified in 1804. The 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951. It is obviously incorrect to believe that those who ratified the 12th Amendment, could have anticipated the 22nd when choosing their wording.
I therefore am already eligible to serve as Hillary's Vice-President. However, I am prepared to go the extra mile for the sake of national unity. I have proposed that the 22nd Amendment be modified such that it limits a President from serving more than 2 consecutive terms, rather than 2 terms in total.
If the 22nd Amendment is modified in time for 2008 election, I will be happy to serve as her Vice-President. If not, I will stand as her Vice-President in the 2012 election, and the 2024 and 2028 elections. Similarly, Hillary will stand as my Vice President in 2016 and 2020.
William Jefferson Clinton
March 10th, 2007 10:02am
Bill's "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" aside, the usual debate is that the Constitution prohibits someone from being *elected* President again, which means he could succeed the office properly, just not be elected again.
I have two objections to anyone choosing Bill as a running mate:
- Just as I thought picking Cheney was stupid, because of all the people in teh country, why would you choose one of the small group of people that cause a Constitutional controversy before even running?
- I'm tired of the same old fucking faces. three hundred million people in this country, does the ballot have to read the same every single time?
March 10th, 2007 10:10am
Clinton wasn't impeached. Impeachment means, you know, putting your office photo frames, moisturizers, and lubricants in a cardboard box, etc.
---"Clinton wasn't impeached. Impeachment means, you know, putting your office photo frames, moisturizers, and lubricants in a cardboard box, etc."----
The problem is the different meanings of impeach. In the sense of 'charging a public official before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office', Clinton was impeached. In the sense of removing a public official from office, especially for misconduct' he wasn't.
Was I impeached?
It depends on the meaning of "was", "I", and "impeached".
But I know one thing for sure: I did not have sex with that woman.
William Jefferson Clinton
March 10th, 2007 2:15pm
Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted.
For a federal official, "impeachment" == "indicted"
March 10th, 2007 3:04pm
Yeah, yeah, and "I was arrested" is a much lesser state than "I was convicted".
"Impeached" tends to mean "kicked out of office by impeachement" as well as "Had articles of impeachment drawn against him by the House."
Bill had the one, not the other.
And since he's HAD his two terms, and therefore is NOT eligible to be President, I would think he could not be appointed as VP.
But other's have better answers, I'm sure.