If Cheney Had a Heart Attack or Resigned, Could George Appoint Jeb to Be His VP?

Wasn't there some law passed after JFK had made RFK his AG to prevent high level appointments of kin?

If not, I could easily see George making Jeb his VP for the rest of the term.

What's the law on this? Could he do it?

and there is no chance of that. Gerald Ford was chosen precisely to avoid a confirmation fight when Nixon needed a new VP.

That's my question.

He's the King! He does whatever the hell he wants and the devil take the hindmost!

But the Senate would have to approve. Knowing this Senate, they probably would...

I don't think Bushler cares too much for our laws in America anymore, so I doubt if he would take "no" for an answer.

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

---

A simple majority vote in both Houses confirming John Ellis Bush as Vice President ain't gonna happen in 2007 or 2008.

Hope that helps answer your question. :)

If the situation were reversed the Republicans would be insisting on not approving anyone not acceptable to them.

I think it's a good chance they would install Lieberman in there. Alternatively, they might put in a seasoned ass coverer like Arlen Specter or Jim Baker.

Nixon knew the Democratic Congress would not approve a GOP VP replacement who might have a chance at running for president in 1976. Thus the choice of Gerald Ford to replace Agnew. Ford won easy approval in both houses of congress.

But, as Gomer said: "Surprise! Surprise Surprise!" Ford did run for president in 1976. But his Watergate-tattered party could not sustain, and Democrat Jimmy Carter won the presidency.

The 25th Amendment is also why Cheney should be impeached and removed before Bu$h. Let the Repugs pick their VP replacement, who is acceptable to the Democrats. That quells the shit-storm that would hit if Nancy Pelosi were to preside over impeachments that accede her to the presidency.

Cheney out. Cheney replaced. Bu$h out. Replacement VP becomes president until January 2009. As you can see, it would never work with Jebthro.

the efforts need to be concentrated on getting Cheney the hell out first, then let Bush twist in the wind for a while.

He changed the wording of the report to say that the bullet (the magic bullet that wounded Connally), entered his neck rather than his back, where the bullet hole in his shirt was.

It changed history, his lie did. For that, he was owed. And when the chance came, he was given the VP slot. Think about it... Who in their right mind would have picked Gerald Ford as Vice President during one of the most shameful periods in American history?

Would the position pay more than what Jeb does now? Why would Bush voluntarily humiliate himself by nominating a non-starter which would fail Congressional approval?

The only restrictions on VP that I'm aware of are...that the VP be able to assume the Presidency legally...and that he doesn't reside in the same state as the President....that's why Cheney claimed to be from Wyoming...even though he lived in Texas at the time

But I thought I remembered Congress passing a law to prevent the situation I described in the OP regarding JFK and his brother.

the deal w/ JFK & LBJ...as I understood it, was that JFK would not have won w/o LBJ ensuring Texas's Electoral Votes...w/o LBJ on the ticket..Texas might've swung Nixon's way...

I have heard it referenced, I can find it referenced in articles (see my post below), but damn if I can actually find it.

there's not really a restriction on the President and VP being from the same state, however, the electors rom that state couldn't vote for both of them.

There'd be no restriction on Bush nominating a Texan as VP, since the electoral college wouldn't be involved at all.

The Constitution does NOT say the president and the vice-president have to be from different states. What it says, is when the electors meet to choose a president and a vice-president, at least one of them must be from a different state than the electors are from.

The president and vice-president have been a package deal for a very long time, which means that if the president and the vice-president are from the same state their home state's electors have to either abstain or vote for the other guy. Bernie Sanders could run for president, pick another Vermonter and still probably win the election--Vermont only has three EV. Brian Schweitzer from Montana and Mike Gravel from Alaska are in the same boat. I don't think anyone WOULD throw away their home state's votes--the symbolism alone would kill most people's chances--but they could if they wanted to.

The situation changes when you're from 34-vote Texas. You cannot throw that away for anything.

This is a yes/no situation: yes, it's legal; no, no one would ever do it.

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/06/the-liz-cheney-.html

"Sally Quinn's column on a GOP Plan to Oust Cheney. And like desertwind, my first thoughts when I read Quinn's prediction that Cheney would step down with heart trouble and Fred Thompson would replace him--if Quinn is right, this is really an attempt to install another figurehead president controlled by someone named Cheney.

Most importantly, though, I have imagined that Thompson is the GOP's best chance to replicate the un-American structure of the Bush Presidency, where all the major decisions appear to be made in the margins, by Cheney, all the while Cheney protects himself by invoking his creative theories of being a fourth branch of government. You see, I'm really beginning to believe that Thompson is in so that those committed to continuing the basic policies of the Bush Administration can do so, once again behind the facade of a puppet president.

And then I read this:

Politico's Mike Allen told NPR that Fred Thompson has a notable foreign policy advisor: first daughter of the OVP, Liz Cheney."

:scared:

(Or Lieberman.)

Any replacement VP is not an "appointment". It has to be approved, just like a judge or any other high official.

Senate approval aside, wisdom of the move aside, can Bush legally submit his brother's name to the Senate to be VP?

I only want to know the law.

There doesn't seem to be a "relative clause" which would prevent family members from serving as Prez/VP.

Requirements for President:
Section One: Article II, of the U.S. Constitution:
Requirements: The president must be a natural-born citizen of the United States.

Must be at least 35 years of age.

Must have been a resident of the United States for 14 years.

The President is limited to serving two terms.

Requirements for Vice-President:

Anyone who can get approval by Congress.

Astrologically speaking, it's Jeb....

The first: Clarence Thomas. Danforth was his chief sponsor.
The second: After Bush was appointed prez by the 5 Supreme Court justices in 2000 and there was unrest throughout the country, Danforth and former senator Sam Nunn wrote an op-ed for the NY Times urging Americans to give Bush a chance.
The third: In 2000 Danforth was a finalist in the search for Bush's vp running mate-one of the people interviewed by Dick Cheney. As part of that process, we were told at the time, each finalist was asked to verbally reveal the worst item in their past that might come to light during the campaign. (This was considered information so sensitive the finalists were told not to put in in writing). What this means is that if Danforth has some such item in his past, Cheney knows and thus has power over him.

Danforth is a man of demonstrated poor judgment.

or Lugar being stuck in there. Someone who will pass Congressional scrutiny without controversy.

somebody old school who has nothing to lose by being associated with the train wreck that is the Bush Administartion, I'm thinking Arlen Specter.

the VP is the only office where the House gets confirmation authority.

Amendment 25 - Presidential Disability and Succession. Ratified 2/10/1967.

<snip>

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

link: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am25

I can not find anything that would prevent Bush from submitting Jeb's name to be VP.

I didn't find anything about my earlier statement of state residency either...maybe that was some kind of RNC guideline 'er something...it's been 7 years...I've had a few beers since then...

after searching the 12th & 25th Amendments and reading Article II.....and finding nothing...I'm ready for bed....I used to read the Constitution to put myself to sleep back when I was in the service...man 15 years later...and I'm still progammed..LOL

g'nite!!

Which states that the electors (who ultimately cast ballots for the pres and vp) "shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice President, one of whom, at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. What this means, essentially, is that, if both the Pres and his/her running mate were from the same state, the electors from that state would not be able to cast their ballots for both. That would create the theoretical possiblity, in a close election, of the Presidential candidate from one party and the VP candidate from the other party being elected. For example, if Cheney and Bush had both been deemed to be from Texas in 2000, then the electors from that state could've cast their ballots for Chimpy or cheney, but not both, in which case either Gore or Lieberman would've been elected to the presidency or vice presidency.

Weird, eh...

Every fishing expedition I've done resulted in dry holes. I could never find the "law" that I've heard about and the media mentions from time to time (as I posted the CNN story). I appreciate your effort.

Hell will freeze over before this Congress goes for that.

"After all, Jack Kennedy chose his 36-year-old brother Bobby. Of course, there are now anti-nepotism laws against that." http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/10/20/bierbauer/


I have heard about this "law" a million times, but can never find the law itself. And if there is one, I'd like to read it so as to see if it would pertain to the position of the VP.

Nothing prevents W from nominating Jeb. But again, Congress will never approve.

5 USC Sec. 3110:3110. Employment of relatives; restrictions


(a) For the purpose of this section—
(1) agency means—
(A) an Executive agency;
(B) an office, agency, or other establishment in the legislative branch;
(C) an office, agency, or other establishment in the judicial branch; and
(D) the government of the District of Columbia;
(2) “public official” means an officer (including the President and a Member of Congress), a member of the uniformed service, an employee and any other individual, in whom is vested the authority by law, rule, or regulation, or to whom the authority has been delegated, to appoint, employ, promote, or advance individuals, or to recommend individuals for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement in connection with employment in an agency; and
(3) “relative” means, with respect to a public official, an individual who is related to the public official as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, or half sister.
(b) A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official. An individual may not be appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced in or to a civilian position in an agency if such appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement has been advocated by a public official, serving in or exercising jurisdiction or control over the agency, who is a relative of the individual.


The reason it wouldn't apply is that the Presidency and Vice Presidency do not fall within the definition of an "agency" in the statute. The relevant part of the agency definition is "Executive agency" and that term, as defined elsewhere in Title V (5 USC Sec. 105) refers to Executive Departments and those Depts, as enumerated, don't include the Office of the President or the Office of the Vice President.

So I don't think the law blocks it. Common sense will, however.

Section D2 says that a public official includes the President.

Good find.

the VP doesn't fall within the definition of those terms.

My thread was in search of the actual law. Thanks.

But he'd need approval as others have already said. They could, if the dems are serious about holding his feet to the fire, trade an end to war for the vp of his choice, or take a page out of his book and run out the clock by using stall tactics.

I think he'd pick her. And also that she'd probably be confirmed.

:scared:

if Bush could submit Jeb's name, it opens up a whole new world...pardons, continued secrecy, continued cronyism, and a whole lot more.

She seems much more vicious and intelligent than Jeb.

Plus, everyone knows she lurves W. Jeb is a Bush. His first loyalty is to himself. :)

Kind of Sleazy would be the logical choice...I think she is the evil spawn of the Great Evil One...Cheney...I hear he had his DNA spliced into the DNA of Colin Powel and she was grown in a vat deep in the bowels of the Bones Tomb...

Bush has claimed that the Legislative Branch has no power over him during "wartime" - and the Legislative Branch has not particularly disagreed, so the Executive might actually get to keep this power.

scenarios play out. Politics used to be only contained within the bounds of the country, but now it is global. I do remember Jeb making a trip to China but then so does Ahnold, and Bill Richardson goes to North Korea, but at least he fixes things there. Without the counterbalance of the opposing party there is no working government, we are just about there now, anymore of this chicanery by this administration and they will just take their entire party down to the bottom of the ocean for good.

Bush would appoint him anyway; he has no problem breaking the law. My guess is that this "royal" family is waiting to install him after a couple terms pass.

". . . after the death of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and the resulting vice-presidential vacancy, Congress debated what became the second constitutional amendment related to the structure of the vice-presidency. In 1967, the Twenty-fifth Amendment, addressing presidential vacancy and disability, became part of our Constitution. The absence of any provision for filling a vice-presidential vacancy had become intolerable in the nuclear age. Added impetus for the change came from a growing public concern at the time about the advanced ages of President pro tempore Carl Hayden, who was eighty, and House Speaker John W. McCormack, who was seventy-six. The amendment states that the president may appoint a vice president to fill a vacancy in that office, subject to approval by both houses of Congress. Before a decade had passed, the provision was used twice, first in 1973 when President Nixon appointed Gerald R. Ford to replace Spiro Agnew, who had resigned, and again in 1974, with the appointment of Nelson Rockefeller after Nixon himself resigned and Ford became president. The amendment also sets forth very specifically the steps that would permit the vice president to serve as acting president if a president becomes "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office." Each of these changes further reflected the increased importance of the office. . . "

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Vice_President.htm

Has there ever been an "official" explanation?

would have run instead of Junior. He knows he has a sucky personality and has to work from the darkside, in the shadows, his own words. Now it seems his health may keep him from doing it by succession, like Bush buying the farm. However, since he's in fact President in everything but name, why bother?

If he had put himself out as candidate in 2000 he had a good chance of winning, he certainly would have come of better than Bush. Before his VP stint Repubs loved Cheney. They remember him under Reagan and he came off as tough talking, saavy, articulate and hawkish. He didn't really have the scowling, sneering, secretive, "I don't care what you think" ass wipe persona he has now.

But, he'd rather have the focus on someone else while he works his craft advancing his agenda behind closed doors and in secret. IMHO

Many who voted for Bush wouldn't have voted for him. They accepted him on the Bush ticket like many of us accepted Lieberman on Gore's ticket. Lieberman didn't get anywhere running on his own. Cheney at least realized his lack of charisma where Lieberman didn't.

be eligible to be VP and that nomination would be subject to confirmation.

We could let Bush finish out his term with no VP.

I think that he would have to nominate a VP.

Bush can nominate all he wants but there's no requirement or timetable of any kind for congress to approve his nomination. They could just let it slide and go without a VP for the rest of his term.

that would have pretty heavy implications in the Senate possibly.

a constitutional crisis but the constitution lays out a clear line of succession for the presidency. Not having a VP isn't a big deal or danger to the democracy. We just wouldn't have a tie breaker in the Senate.

.