Democrat Seeks To Change Presidential Removal Procedure

community
By:  @community, 9 months ago
Comments: 91 ..

Tags

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) filed a bill during the two-week April break that would let the vice president and former presidents collaborate to decide if a president is fit for office.

“It is hard to imagine a better group to work with the vice president to examine whether the president is able to discharge the duties of the office," Blumenauer said. When there are questions about the president’s ability to fulfill his or her constitutional responsibilities, it is in the country’s best interest to have a mechanism in place that works effectively."

According to The Hill, Blumenauer’s proposal stems from the Constitution’s 25th Amendment, which the Democrat claims would fall short in cases of emotional or mental incapacity.

The amendment mandates that the vice president becomes the president if the sitting president dies or resigns. It also lets the VP take over, if the VP and a majority of Cabinet officers agree to the move.

In the event a president refused to step down, two-thirds of both the House and Senate have to vote in favor of removal to force a presidential resignation. 

But Blumenauer says the mechanism is flawed.

 

 

“Because the cabinet can be fired by the president, there is a natural bias that would make them reluctant to acknowledge the president’s inability to serve. It’s time to revisit and strengthen the Amendment and make sure there is a reliable mechanism in place if the president becomes unable to discharge the powers and duties of office,” Blumenauer said.

Blumenauer’s bill aims to have former presidents and vice presidents collaborate with the current vice president instead.

Blumenauer discussed his idea on the House floor back in February.

Several Democratic lawmakers have publicly questioned President Trump’s psychological state since his election.

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/democrat-seeks-change-presidential-removal-procedure

Flagging unavailable
jrDiscussion - desc
96WS6
link   96WS6    9 months ago

More short shortsightedness

 
 
PJ
link   PJ    9 months ago

This is a very bad idea.  There are already ways to remove an unfit President and this would take away the power from the people.  This is dangerous and stupid.

Trump and his idiot heirs will hang themselves eventually when their constant ethic violations catch up with them.

 
 
96WS6
link   96WS6  replied to  PJ   9 months ago

PJ I must say I am impressed that you see the true danger of this stupid move.  Most liberals are 100% behind it.   I think the nuclear option was equally as short sighted.

 
 
PJ
link   PJ  replied to  96WS6   9 months ago

There is your error.  I am not a liberal but because I do have some liberal leanings I have been attacked constantly on this site as a liberal and laughed at when I say I am moderate on some issues.  I guess my views about women have upset many of the men here so I'm labeled a democrat.  Which is silly because it only reinforces the common belief that republicans don't value women aside from fuck toys and being able to control them.  

 
 
Jerry Verlinger
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  PJ   9 months ago

Trump and his idiot heirs will hang themselves eventually when their constant ethic violations catch up with them.

There are a lot of Americans that feel the same way.

I've heard there are actually voting pools available that are based on the time that will happen.

My guess is, Trump will be in office for less than two years. 

(If the country can survive under a Trump presidency for that long)

 
 
Sean Treacy
link   Sean Treacy    9 months ago

This is a shiny thing to distract the hate filled extremists who constitute the base of the democratic party.

It will go nowhere. 

 
 
Jerry Verlinger
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  Sean Treacy   9 months ago

It will go nowhere. 

I would not place a bet on that.

 
 
96WS6
link   96WS6  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   9 months ago

I would.

 
 
1ofmany
link   1ofmany    9 months ago

Because the cabinet can be fired by the president, there is a natural bias that would make them reluctant to acknowledge the president’s inability to serve.

That's the point dummy. Involving the president's own cabinet appointees removes partisanship from the equation. If these people will risk their jobs to say that the president is crazy, then he might actually be crazy. 

Blumenauer has a zero chance of getting this bill through a republican congress or overcoming a veto. He should draft his bills on toilet paper so they will at least serve a useful alternative. 

 
 
Spikegary
link   Spikegary    9 months ago

In related news, Representative Don Quixote (D-Calif) has not only voiced his support for this bill, but has vowed to hold his breath until it passes both houses and is signed into law.  The Congressman was unable to comment further, as he was starting to turn blue.......just another windmill....

Seriously, did they learn nothing from the whole 'Super-Majority' fiasco?  So, President Trump waits until his last day in office, then signs the bill into law, if his replacement is a Democrat, of course.  How stupid and short-sighted are these people?

 

 
 
Cerenkov
link   Cerenkov  replied to  Spikegary   9 months ago

Very stupid and very short-sighted.

 
 
96WS6
link   96WS6  replied to  Spikegary   9 months ago

"How stupid and short-sighted are these people?"

 

Very.  How much more proof do you need?

 
 
Jerry Verlinger
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  Spikegary   9 months ago

So, President Trump waits until his last day in office, then signs the bill into law

It can't wait that long. 


The veto becomes effective when the President fails to sign a bill after Congress has adjourned and is unable to override the veto. The authority of the pocket veto is derived from the Constitution's Article I, section 7, “the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case, it shall not be law.”Sep 29, 2016
Presidential Vetoes | US House of Representatives:

 
 
96WS6
link   96WS6  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   9 months ago

Says one of the shortsighted we speak of.  You would overturn the rules of democracy forever to get your way at the moment. Haven't you learned after the crap with Reid and, because of it,  the "nuclear option" with Gorsuch?  Do you not understand the power that is now in Trumps hands because of the actions of Obama you cheered?  When will you learn?

 
 
Spikegary
link   Spikegary  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   9 months ago

So, working with the Congress and Senate, the bill doesn't get debated and voted on until the Republicans are good and ready (for examples of this, just read the history of Harry Reid as Senate majority Leader).  Do you really think that the Republicans will hesitate to use the rules of the game as the other side of the aisle did while they were in power?  Are you that naïve?

 
 
A. Macarthur
link   A. Macarthur    9 months ago

Ladies and gentlemen, I very much dislike deleting comments and do so very rarely; so please, for the good of the site, stop insulting one another and discuss the content of the article.

 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.    9 months ago

It is stupid and short sighted.. but no more than the nuclear option that was done for SCOTUS. As we say in NY, What goes around comes around, and none of these people seem to see this. 

This time, if this passed, all it would take is a power hungry VP. How utterly dangerous and undemocratic. 

 
 
Cerenkov
link   Cerenkov  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   9 months ago

The Republicans probably wouldn't have invoked that option if Reid hadn't already used it so heavily.

 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Cerenkov   9 months ago

Reid used it once, to stop filibusters, which was on a huge upswing over the last 10 years. That is a far cry from using it for a SCOTUS position. It will come back and bite them in the butt eventually. 

 
 
96WS6
link   96WS6  replied to  Cerenkov   9 months ago

They certainly wouldn't have used it had the Dems not changed the laws.  PERIOD!!!!!

 
 
96WS6
link   96WS6  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   9 months ago

I agree Perrie the nuclear option on SCOTUS was as short sighted as Reed doing the same for appointees,

Reid used it once, to stop filibusters, which was on a huge upswing over the last 10 years. That is a far cry from using it for a SCOTUS position. It will come back and bite them in the butt eventually.

Not to be outdone, now the Dems want to be able to choose your president for you.  Evidently picking the Democratic candidate for you is not enough

 

Pure INSANITY

 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  96WS6   9 months ago

Thank you '96! I think this business with removing a seated president is beyond dangerous. This is a precedent that could be so abused that it could undermine the republic. How utterly short sighted. 

 
 
Randy
link   Randy    9 months ago

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) filed a bill during the two-week April break that would let the vice president and former presidents collaborate to decide if a president is fit for office

Goes a bit too far. I'm happy with letting the VP and members of the Cabinet or Congress under Section 4 of the 25th keep their place in deciding if Trump is bat shit crazy (he's really not that crazy, just incredibly incompetent and in waaaaaaaay over his head) and needs to be removed from office. Now I don't think he's fit for office on that basis, but that won't be shown until he bumbles us into a war just by a complete fuck up on his own. Which he will.

 
 
Randy
link   Randy  replied to  Randy   9 months ago

The real question is will VP Pence, the Cabinet and especially the GOP Congress act invoke the 25th Amendment in America's best interests or will they, as they are now and have been so far, let scandal after scandal and failure after failure and foreign policy screw up after foreign policy screw up continue, just because they have a pliable, though massively corrupt person sitting in the Oval Office, who is so intertwined with the Russians that it is impossible to tell where Trump leaves off and Putin begins, before they act to remove this incredibly defective, obviously defective and even dangerous national security risk? Trump is getting close to being proved to be nothing less then a Russian asset. The question is not that. The question is how many Republicans in the House and Senate will put their Party desires over who they are and what they believe in as patriotic Americans. In other words, are they Americans first? Or are they Republicans first and thereby willing to lean Russian first? Only they can answer this question that holds our nations future in the balance.

 
 
Cerenkov
link   Cerenkov  replied to  Randy   9 months ago

We will not fundamentally undermine the office of the president based solely on Russian birtherism from the lunatic fringe.

 
 
Spikegary
link   Spikegary  replied to  Randy   9 months ago

You should remove names from your thoughts and just use the offices.  Is it a good idea, regardless of who is in that office, for the President, duly elected by the citizens of the United States to be removed by the VP, Cabinet and ex-Presidents?  In most places, that would be called a coup.

Let me ask, if a Republican had fielded legislation akin to this when Presdient Obama was in office, would you be climbing onboard this particular train?

 
 
Randy
link   Randy  replied to  Spikegary   9 months ago

In most places, that would be called a coup.

In the United States of America it called Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It has to be there to remove a President who can no longer perform the duties of their office for either physical or mental reasons. We can not have a President who is so physically disabled (such as a coma) or obviously Mad (insane) or even dangerously incompetent, running the country and this clause must remain in force. I don't agree at all with the new proposed bill, but I am a HUGH advocate for Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, it's meaning and if necessary it's use. No matter the political party of the President.

 
 
Dowser
link   Dowser    9 months ago

Personally, I think it is going to come back and bite them.  NOT a good idea.

 
 

Share This

Who is online

David Smith
Jeremy Retired in NC
Gordy327
Ender
arkpdx
lady in black
bccrane
MrFrost
GaJenn78
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom

loki12
epistte
dennis smith


33 visitors