Who would become President if Bush were to die right now?

[Shera]

Would Dick Cheney take over until Obama is sworn in in January, or would Obama take office a little early?

[diggleblop]

Cheney.

[Shagnasty]

Originally Posted by Shera

Would Dick Cheney take over until Obama is sworn in in January, or would Obama take office a little early?

Bush is still the president. It simply goes in the order of succession just like it always would. It would be Cheney as noted. Obama doesn't have a presidential role in the least until the electoral college votes and, even then, he still has to wait his turn until he is sworn in.

[Little Nemo]

Cheney is Bush's successor and will remain so until Obama and Biden are sworn into their offices.

[Markxxx]

Just of of curiosity, I am assuming the Vice President becomes President the second the president is dead right? It's not when he takes the oath is it?

Like Johnson was legally President as soon as Kennedy was pronounced dead right?

Or am I mistaken?

[Sailboat]

This is why George isn't taking any hunting trips with Dick this fall.

[Shagnasty]

Originally Posted by Markxxx

Just of of curiosity, I am assuming the Vice President becomes President the second the president is dead right? It's not when he takes the oath is it?

Like Johnson was legally President as soon as Kennedy was pronounced dead right?

Or am I mistaken?

LBJ was sworn in very quickly but it wasn't an instant process. IIRC, they had find the right people to do the swearing in as fast as possible and transition responsibilities. I am almost certain that, after the swearing in, his plane changed to the call-sign Air-Force One but other Dopers have said that wasn't true yet I have never seen anything to refute it. It took a few hours to swear LBJ officially as POTUS.

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/US/11/22/kennedy.tapes/

[seodoa]

Originally Posted by Shera

Would Dick Cheney take over until Obama is sworn in in January, or would Obama take office a little early?

I hope you're not trying to work out plans to get Obama in early...

[kunilou]

Originally Posted by Shagnasty

LBJ was sworn in very quickly but it wasn't an instant process. IIRC, they had find the right people to do the swearing on the plane as fast as possible and transition responsibilities. I am almost certain that, after the swearing in, his plane changed to the call-sign Air-Force One but other Dopers have said that wasn't true yet I have never seen anything to refute it. It took a few hours to swear LBJ officially as POTUS.

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/US/11/22/kennedy.tapes/

It wasn't until 1967 when the 25rh Amendment cleared up the question of succession completely.

1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

No mention of swearing in or any other intermediate step. The VP shall become President.

However, from a practical standpoint, Johnson became President as soon as Kennedy was pronounced dead, per the original Language of Article 2, section 1.

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President...

Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1:00 p.m., Dallas time. Johnson was sworn in at 2:38 p.m., Dallas time. Johnson returned to Washington on the same plane Kennedy had arrived in, the plane in which Kennedy's body was returned to Washington. There was no "switching" of the call sign -- it was the same aircraft throughout.

[Saint Cad]

My understanding is that immediately upon the death of the President, the Vice-President becomes President (25th Amendment) but cannot perform the duties until sworn in (Article II, Section 1).

[Chronos]

Obama doesn't have a presidential role in the least until the electoral college votes and, even then, he still has to wait his turn until he is sworn in.

At least, no official presidential role, but then, much of what a president does isn't official anyway. For instance, he's already advising the Democrats in congress how to vote on certain issues, and even though his advice doesn't hold any more official weight than any other senator's, most of them are listening to him.

[Captain Carrot]

Originally Posted by Chronos

For instance, he's already advising the Democrats in congress how to vote on certain issues, and even though his advice doesn't hold any more official weight than any other senator's, most of them are listening to him.

Nitpick: his advice doesn't hold any more official weight than anyone else's at all, since he is no longer a member of the US Senate. He resigned effective Monday the 17th. Quite possibly Biden will also resign before Jan. 3rd so his replacement will be slightly senior to Shaheen, Warner, Begich, T. Udall, M. Udall, Hagan, Merkley, and possibly Franken and/or Martin, although he's said he will resign only when he is sworn in, for whatever reason. You'd think he'd want to give his replacement time to learn the ropes, although possibly this is happening anyway.


Why yes, I do like reeling off the list of newly elected Dems in the Senate.

[Little Nemo]

On a related question, the 20th Amendement (enacted in 1933) specifies that the Presidential and Vice Presidential term of office ends on the January 20 following the election. It also created a procedure for filling a vacancy in the Vice Presidency - prior to that, the vacancy was left unfilled.

So what would have happened if the Vice President elect had died between the electoral college vote and the inauguration? There was no procedure to replace him. And if he was dead, he couldn't be sworn into office. With nobody being sworn in to replace him and no official end date for his term of office, would the previous Vice President's term of office have ended? It seems to me he could claim that he was still Vice President under the new President.

[Jonathan Chance]

No, there were a few cases prior to the current system where the VP was out of office, either removed, resigned, or promoted due to the death of a President, where the position was simply not filled. So there would be no Vice President until the next election.

One of the things many people don't realize is that the primacy of the Vice Presidency (after the President) is a relatively recent thing. For the first 100 years or more of the nation both the Secretary of State and the Secretary of War were positions considered FAR more important and prestigious than the Vice Presidency. So having the position unfilled wasn't considered a true burden or vulnerability of the government.

[Simplicio]

Originally Posted by Captain Carrot

although he's said he will resign only when he is sworn in, for whatever reason. You'd think he'd want to give his replacement time to learn the ropes, although possibly this is happening anyway.

Supposedly, a new Delaware governor will be sworn in at the same time Biden becomes VP. The speculation is that Biden was able to get this new incoming governor to appoint a placeholder in Biden's place, so that his son (who is currently deployed in Iraq) will have a chance to run for an open seat next election.

[Cliffy]

Originally Posted by Saint Cad

My understanding is that immediately upon the death of the President, the Vice-President becomes President (25th Amendment) but cannot perform the duties until sworn in (Article II, Section 1).

That can't be right. I'm too lazy to do the textual analysis right now, but my understanding is that the powers of the president immediately transfer to the VP as Acting President. The country cannot be without an effective head of state or commander-in-chief, especially since the death of a president is likely itself a crisis requiring the attention of the president.

Originally Posted by Simplicio

The speculation is that Biden was able to get this new incoming governor to appoint a placeholder in Biden's place, so that his son (who is currently deployed in Iraq) will have a chance to run for an open seat next election.

I'm skeptical of this claim for the simple reason that the current governor (Ruth Ann Minner, a Democrat) could have just appointed Beau Biden to the seat as an initial matter, giving him the incumbency at the next election. I don't say Beau won't run when the seat comes open, just that they didn't need the kind of engineering you suggest to put Beau in the seat.

--Cliffy

[Telcontar]

Originally Posted by Saint Cad

My understanding is that immediately upon the death of the President, the Vice-President becomes President (25th Amendment) but cannot perform the duties until sworn in (Article II, Section 1).

Note that, despite tradition, the President can take the oath of office in his bathrobe in front of an Elvis impersonator on a copy of Playboy. This is why LBJ was sworn in by "nearest respectable judicial figure" on "nearest available Holy Book" rather than needing to wait for the more formal process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_...ohn_F._Kennedy

[Whack-a-Mole]

Originally Posted by kunilou

Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1:00 p.m., Dallas time. Johnson was sworn in at 2:38 p.m., Dallas time. Johnson returned to Washington on the same plane Kennedy had arrived in, the plane in which Kennedy's body was returned to Washington. There was no "switching" of the call sign -- it was the same aircraft throughout.

"Air Force One" is the designation of any plane the President happens to be on. If you take him for a ride in a glider that is Air Force One (I think...not sure if it has to have actual Air Force pilots to gain the designation). The designation follows the President...not the plane.

The question is, I suppose, was Johnson actually President when he boarded the plane or only President upon being sworn in on the plane? If the latter then the plane took off as Air Force Two with the VP and landed as Air Force One with the President aboard. If Johnson was technically President when he boarded the plane then it was Air Force One all along.

ETA: Looks like Johnson was sworn in on the ground (albeit in the plane). So when it took off it was Air Force One by definition.

[friedo]

Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole

"Air Force One" is the designation of any plane the President happens to be on. If you take him for a ride in a glider that is Air Force One (I think...not sure if it has to have actual Air Force pilots to gain the designation). The designation follows the President...not the plane.

If it's a civilian aircraft, the callsign is "Executive One." It is very rarely used since the president almost never flies on civilian aircraft.

Of course, most gliders probably don't have radios, making it a moot point.

[alphaboi867]

Originally Posted by Cliffy

...I'm skeptical of this claim for the simple reason that the current governor (Ruth Ann Minner, a Democrat) could have just appointed Beau Biden to the seat as an initial matter, giving him the incumbency at the next election. I don't say Beau won't run when the seat comes open, just that they didn't need the kind of engineering you suggest to put Beau in the seat.

--Cliffy

Beau Biden is currently deployed in Iraq. If he was appointed to the Senate he'd need to come home early and that could look bad politcally.


As for callsigns it depends on what military branch operates the aircraft; Air Force = Air Force One (duh), Army = Army One (old presidential helicopters), Navy = Navy One (Bush's carrier stunt), Marine One (modern presidential helicopters), Coast Guard One (none so far), and a civilian craft = Executive One (Nixon took a commercial charter once).

[Whack-a-Mole]

Just to muddy the water :

If the VP becomes acting President (e.g. when Reagan was in surgery Bush was acting President) does his plane become Air Force One?

[Telcontar]

Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole

Just to muddy the water :

If the VP becomes acting President (e.g. when Reagan was in surgery Bush was acting President) does his plane become Air Force One?

It becomes Air Force 1.5 :-P

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by Cliffy

I'm skeptical of this claim for the simple reason that the current governor (Ruth Ann Minner, a Democrat) could have just appointed Beau Biden to the seat as an initial matter, giving him the incumbency at the next election. I don't say Beau won't run when the seat comes open, just that they didn't need the kind of engineering you suggest to put Beau in the seat.

I think part of the issue might be that Beau Biden doesn't want to be an appointee and then run as an incumbent, for the sake of appearance. He doesn't want to be a Lisa Murkowski.

[Little Nemo]

No, there were a few cases prior to the current system where the VP was out of office, either removed, resigned, or promoted due to the death of a President, where the position was simply not filled. So there would be no Vice President until the next election.

One of the things many people don't realize is that the primacy of the Vice Presidency (after the President) is a relatively recent thing. For the first 100 years or more of the nation both the Secretary of State and the Secretary of War were positions considered FAR more important and prestigious than the Vice Presidency. So having the position unfilled wasn't considered a true burden or vulnerability of the government.

I'm aware of all of this. There are several means by which a Vice President's term of office can end: death, resignation, impeachment, being replaced by a new Vice President being sworn in, or being sworn in as President. And the 20th Amendment apparently created a new one: the Vice President's term of office automatically ends on Inauguration Day. But in the scenario I described, none of these would have happened. So why would his term end? Was there any law that specified the automatic end date of a Vice Presidential term prior to 1933?

[Northern Piper]

yes - the Constitution, Article II, s. 1:

1. The Executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold office during the term of four years, and together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term...

So that's where the four year term comes from.

The 20th Amendment didn't set the four year term - it merely set a new date for the four year terms of the POTUS and the Veep to end:

1. The terms of the President and the Vice-President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3rd day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

The Amendment simply says when "the terms" shall end - it doesn't say that their terms are for four years. The four year term continues to be governed by Article II, s 1. The purpose of the Amendment was to reduce the lengthy "lame duck" period. The terms used to end in March, because Washington was first sworn in in March.

[t-bonham@scc.net]

Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole

Just to muddy the water :

If the VP becomes acting President (e.g. when Reagan was in surgery Bush was acting President) does his plane become Air Force One?

I believe the policy is that during times when the President is incapable of functioning as President (like in surgery), the VP (Acting President) is kept out of risky situations (like flying around in planes).

[t-bonham@scc.net]

Originally Posted by Markxxx

Like Johnson was legally President as soon as Kennedy was pronounced dead right?

Or am I mistaken?

I seem to recall reading that Johnson was in a waiting room at Parkland Hospital with other officials, when the military officer carrying the briefcase of nuclear codes exited the Emergency Room where Kennedy was and walked into that waiting room. And at that moment, prior to being informed by the doctors, they knew that JFK had died.

Whether LBJ was legally President at that time or not, clearly the military saw him as the new Commander-in-Chief, and were willing to obey his orders.

[Northern Piper]

Originally Posted by Cliffy

That can't be right. I'm too lazy to do the textual analysis right now, but my understanding is that the powers of the president immediately transfer to the VP as Acting President. The country cannot be without an effective head of state or commander-in-chief, especially since the death of a president is likely itself a crisis requiring the attention of the president.

Does US law recognise the distinction between mandatory and directory statutory requirements?

In Anglo-Canadian law, the courts have held that even when a statute directs that some formal step be taken , such as swearing an oath of office, a failure to meet that requirement does not mean the officer's actions are void. It's simply an irregularity. The courts focus on the substance , not formalities: was the person lawfully the office-holder? If so, a failure to swear an oath of office doesn't invalidate his or her actions.

As Cliffy points out, the death of the President may trigger a crisis. Do you really want the Constitution's oath requirement to mean that in a crisis, there is no President capable of giving orders to the military and the civil service, until the formality of an oath has been fulfilled?

[Chronos]

I believe the policy is that during times when the President is incapable of functioning as President (like in surgery), the VP (Acting President) is kept out of risky situations (like flying around in planes).

Depending on the circumstances in which the President is incapacitated, flying around in an airplane might be the safest place for the Vice President to be. After the 9-11 attacks, when Bush was hustled off to a safe "undisclosed location", for most of the time, that location was Air Force One itself.

Obviously, this wouldn't be the case for a scheduled downtime like a surgery, but if a 9-11 style attack were to leave the President injured and comatose, they probably would take to the air, and likely with the President and VP in different aircraft (to prevent decapitation if one were shot down).

[Elendil's Heir]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

On a related question, the 20th Amendement (enacted in 1933) specifies that the Presidential and Vice Presidential term of office ends on the January 20 following the election. It also created a procedure for filling a vacancy in the Vice Presidency - prior to that, the vacancy was left unfilled....

The 20th Amendment did what you say it did in your first sentence. However, the appointment of VPs to midterm vacancies had to wait until the ratification of the 25th Amendment in 1967.

Before then, it was generally thought that the new President took office instantly upon the death or resignation of his predecessor; the 25th Amendment just made it clear. But Art. II, Sec. 1, cl. 8 still provides, "Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation...." So you might be President, but you can't do anything presidential until sworn in.

[greatshakes]

IIRC, the constitution is subject to Obama's convenience.

could be wrong, though.

[Elendil's Heir]

Yes, you are. On Jan. 20, he'll swear the same oath to preserve, protect and defend it as all of his predecessors.

[Gfactor]

Originally Posted by greatshakes

IIRC, the constitution is subject to Obama's convenience.

could be wrong, though.

Please refrain from political jabs in the General Questions forum.

Gfactor
General Questions Moderator

[Markxxx]

But what about like a nuclear strike.

Suppose the president was killed in a nuclear blast. Obviously the VP would become president. But if he became president couldn't exercise the powers of president till he was sworn in, how could he respond to the blast?

[Elendil's Heir]

Swearing-in takes just moments. But you're right, it just might be the least of his or her worries at the time.

[Vox Imperatoris]

I suspect the military wouldn't really care, but it really doesn't take that long to say that oath. Another poster has already pointed out that the extra ceremony of the Chief Justice et al. is not necessary.

Valete,
Vox Imperatoris

[greatshakes]

Originally Posted by Gfactor

Please refrain from political jabs in the General Questions forum.

Gfactor
General Questions Moderator

Gotcha.

Sorry, all.

[Northern Piper]

Except that the precedent of Calvin Coolidge says that only certain people can administer the oath of office to the Veep. Cal was staying with his dad when he heard that Harding had died. His dad was a notary public, and swore Cal in. Doubts were raised whether a state official could swear in a federal official, so Cal had a do-over, in front of a federal judge.

So if the pool of people who can swear in a President is limited, what happens during a crisis, and the Veep has been hustled to his "secure location", and is told the Prez bought it, but there's no-one in the location who has authority to swear him in? Does he say, "Well, you better contact the Speaker, since he's acting President?" or does he say that he's the President by succession and the operation of law, and will take the oath as soon as there's someone able to administer it, but in the meantime, he's prepared to govern?

[Elendil's Heir]

Doubts were raised about Coolidge's oath at the time, it's true, but from what I've read the consensus today is that Coolidge's father - a justice of the peace in Vermont as well as a notary public, IIRC - had the authority to administer oaths to any official, be he federal, state or local.

The likelihood of a new President being isolated somewhere with no one authorized to administer oaths - the Secretary of State, for instance - is very, very slight. Commissioned officers of the military are authorized to administer oaths, aren't they? They do when new soldiers, airmen, sailors or Marines are inducted into their respective services, so why not the new CINC? In a crisis such as you describe, there's bound to be a commissioned officer (or many) around. I suppose it could even be done by phone.

Let's hope we never have to find out.

[Northern Piper]

Hadn't thought of the military angle - I believe officers in the Canadian Armed Forces are authorized to administer an oath, so should have realized that US officers would be able to as well. That certainly reduces the concern. Agree that I hope the issue never actually arises.

by the way, do you know if the mandatory/directory distinction I mentioned upthread is recognised in the US? I had to research it once, and all the references I found were either Canadian or British cases.

[Vaderesque]

A friend of mine who is a student of US politics told me that in the event of a post-election presidential death, one possibility was that the Vice-President, on becoming President, would appoint the President-Elect as VP, and then resign 24 hours later, allowing the new guy to take control straight away. I can't remember if this was an informal agreement that the parties had discussed, or just a suggestion by some politicals professor, but it struck me as a very sensible idea.

[Jonathan Chance]

Anything like that would be informal. Even if there is an agreement between the two major parties it holds no official weight from a constitutional standpoint. Honestly, from the Constitution's point of view political parties don't exist.

So it might be a gentlemen's agreement, but no one is bound to it.

[Vaderesque]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance

Honestly, from the Constitution's point of view political parties don't exist.

This is brilliantly ironic given the near impossibility of any other party or independent ever getting a sniff of power.