• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Shortening the Transition of Power Period

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election & the inauguration of the new govt?

  • Total voters
    28
S

sanman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Messages
17,399
Reaction score
7,263
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
 
I said no, I think the president elect needs the time to get their cabinet and whatnot in order and the outgoing president needs time to wrap things up... plus there's also packing and what not. Moving inauguration would also requite a constitutional amendment, which will never happen. Moving election day seems unlikely too.
 
First, every single president does that whenever they are at the end of a lame duck term or lost an election.

Second, let's be honest here: you just want things to speed up without understanding the point of a transitional period. It has already been shortened from March 4 to January 20.

Third, transition actually starts at nomination when the nominee gets daily briefings in the event he or she wins. GSA also starts prepping at this time.

Fourth, the time of transition is more for the incoming than outgoing president. You want them to have the time to prep for getting into White House. Why? Partially because of the Plum Book. This book is printed every four years and contains the Senate's Report on Government Affairs, the House's Government Reform and a list of the 9000 positions that are appointed by the President in the Executive and Legislative branches. This last part should appeal to you as it would help to identify those in the so-called "deep state" and the fact that almost all of these positions only need an appointment from the president with approval from anyone in Congress. But, that takes time. And Trump, as any president would, needs that time.

God, do you people even think anymore?
 
sanman said:
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
Click to expand...

Agree, when a president loses office, the transition to the new presidency should be almost immediate.
 
In the United Kingdom, within mere hours of the election, old Prime Minister out, new Prime Minister in.

We could greatly speed up transitions by greatly reducing the number of offices subject to Senate confirmation. Confine Senate confirmation to true principle officers. That would include cabinet and heads of independent agencies.

And we could clear a lot of Plum Book positions by transferring them to career status. FAR more excepted service positions than necessary.
 
sanman said:
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
Click to expand...

Need to leave enough time for 60 or so lawsuits.
 
sanman said:
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
Click to expand...

When you know the guy about to be President is batshit insane then I can't blame the current President for trying to limit the damage.

Also we know Trump will cling onto power until his final day in office and maybe even beyond if he thinks he can get away with it.
 
Safiel said:
In the United Kingdom, within mere hours of the election, old Prime Minister out, new Prime Minister in.

We could greatly speed up transitions by greatly reducing the number of offices subject to Senate confirmation. Confine Senate confirmation to true principle officers. That would include cabinet and heads of independent agencies.

And we could clear a lot of Plum Book positions by transferring them to career status. FAR more excepted service positions than necessary.
Click to expand...

The UK does it right

Having a period of two months before the newly elected president is sworn in, merely shorten his 48 month term by two months for no discernable advantage.
 
Yes, it should be shorter. There's no reason we need such a long lame-duck session. The schedule was originally this way due to travel times in the pre-automobile era, but those reasons do not apply anymore.
 
sanman said:
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
Click to expand...
Remember last time?
 
Jason Warfield said:
Second, let's be honest here: you just want things to speed up without understanding the point of a transitional period. It has already been shortened from March 4 to January 20.
Click to expand...
The point of the transitional period was to allow for sufficient travel time in the pre-automobile era. That's not really applicable anymore.

Third, transition actually starts at nomination when the nominee gets daily briefings in the event he or she wins. GSA also starts prepping at this time.
Click to expand...
All the more reason to have a shorter post-election transition.

Fourth, the time of transition is more for the incoming than outgoing president. You want them to have the time to prep for getting into White House.
Click to expand...
The incoming president is welcome to continue to solicit advice and counsel from the outgoing president and/or the outgoing president's cabinet and advisors, if he or she deems that to be beneficial for the transition.

Why? Partially because of the Plum Book. This book is printed every four years and contains the Senate's Report on Government Affairs, the House's Government Reform and a list of the 9000 positions that are appointed by the President in the Executive and Legislative branches.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we don't need 9000 positions to be appointed by the president. And perhaps the former incumbents of those offices could retain their office during the transition, unless the new president specifically wants them to step down immediately.

God, do you people even think anymore?
Click to expand...
None of the reasons you cited are particularly good arguments for having such a long presidential transition.
 
sanman said:
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
Click to expand...

This is nothing but backwards right-wing prattle. Nobody from the Biden administration is abusing anything in regard to this.

Trump is abusing status as he as acting like he is the president, and he is not yet in office.

Just stop.
 
Gatsby said:
Yes, it should be shorter. There's no reason we need such a long lame-duck session. The schedule was originally this way due to travel times in the pre-automobile era, but those reasons do not apply anymore.
Click to expand...

Two days are more than sufficient IMO.
 
Rich2018 said:
Two days are more than sufficient IMO.
Click to expand...
I'd be fine with a month or so, since the states need time to certify the winners and the electoral college needs to vote. But I don't see any good reason to extend it beyond that.
 
ColdHardTruth said:
This is nothing but backwards right-wing prattle. Nobody from the Biden administration is abusing anything in regard to this.

Trump is abusing status as he as acting like he is the president, and he is not yet in office.

Just stop.
Click to expand...
Biden has been acting unpresidentially like a non-president throughout his term. He prefers to take naps and let his handlers run things -- run the country into the ground.
 
sanman said:
Biden has been acting unpresidentially like a non-president throughout his term. He prefers to take naps and let his handlers run things -- run the country into the ground.
Click to expand...
This is nonsensical right-wing bullshit.

Turn off the Faux.

They lied to you, and they admitted they lied to you.
 
sanman said:
Biden has been acting unpresidentially like a non-president throughout his term. He prefers to take naps and let his handlers run things -- run the country into the ground.
Click to expand...

I suppose the "Executive time" Trump had during his first term didn't exist?
 
Gatsby said:
I'd be fine with a month or so, since the states need time to certify the winners and the electoral college needs to vote. But I don't see any good reason to extend it beyond that.
Click to expand...

No they don't. The states could certify the result within 24 hours of the polls closing.

Senate confirmation is not necessary. The attorney general could simply announce the result the day following the states certification

If the presidential election is held on the Tuesday, the winner could be sworn in the following Monday.
 
sanman said:
Biden has been acting unpresidentially like a non-president throughout his term. He prefers to take naps and let his handlers run things -- run the country into the ground.
Click to expand...
Nonsensical drivel.

You have ZERO evidence of that.

Stop watching Faux.
 
sanman said:
The gap between the November election verdict and the Jan 20 inauguration of the new administration is being abused by the outgoing loser admin, who are making all kinds of new radical policy initiatives in contradiction to the longstanding traditions and practices on the transition of power.

Should there be a shorter transition period between the election and the inauguration of the new govt, in order to reduce scope for mischief and abuse?

Please answer the poll question above, and give your reasons why or why not in the thread.
Click to expand...
Did I miss the riots and the breaking into a USA gov't building?

What the heck is this thread about?

It takes that much time to get all the I's dotted and T's crossed and ensure the cry babies that do lose get all their court cases heard.

What radical new policies have been implemented?
You realize, a president can't make policies? He can only sign bills into laws congress sends, and perhaps enact EOs, which then can be undone by a new president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom