• 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!

Speaker of the House

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
62,819
Reaction score
52,368
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Is it possible for the House majority to elect a Speaker that is not a member of the HoR?


Article One, Section Two, Clause Five is a bit vague.
 
Is it possible for the House majority to elect a Speaker that is not a member of the HoR?


Article One, Section Two, Clause Five is a bit vague.

It would be helpful if you'd post the text you reference.
 
It would be helpful if you'd post the text you reference.
mea culpa


The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.
 
Is it possible for the House majority to elect a Speaker that is not a member of the HoR?


Article One, Section Two, Clause Five is a bit vague.

No, the speaker has duties within the House.
 
It has been expressed, repeatedly, in academia, that it is not a stated requirement that the House Speaker be a voting Member of the body. However, it is unlikely, and would upend a number of legal expectations, were that to happen. Among them the presidential succession order.
 
It has been expressed, repeatedly, in academia, that it is not a stated requirement that the House Speaker be a voting Member of the body. However, it is unlikely, and would upend a number of legal expectations, were that to happen. Among them the presidential succession order.
How would the fact that the SoH is not a House member affect the order of succession?
 
How would the fact that the SoH is not a House member affect the order of succession?
It's not that the Speaker is not a Member, it's that the order of succession lists the Speaker of the House in the line of succession. In the case of the inability of the President and Vice President to continue to serve, that would mean an unelected person (except by the House Membership) would become President, a prospect that a number of people object to. In all other cases, the person has been elected to office, or appointed and confirmed by a majority of the Senate - thus vetted publicly. I was merely pointing out that there are expectations of the Speakership that are not, strictly speaking, in the Constitution.

There are practical reasons, I think, for both selection of the Speaker from the membership (the norm), and for picking an outside person. Under the present situation, the Speaker acts not only as the leader of the House itself, but of their party. I consider this, often, to be a conflict of interest, and many Speakers have taken that to extremes (Newt Gingrich and Denny Hastert come to mind). The House is supposed to represent all of the people, not just their party, and the Speaker should be someone that takes that to heart. In that regard, selection of someone from outside of the Members could further that purpose. On the other hand, I think it would be difficult, as a practical matter, for the Speaker to influence Members if they, themselves, didn't have to run for office or have a vote in Congress.
 
Looking forward to Republican Congressional candidates pledging to vote for Trump as House Speaker if they win.

I'd like to see the look on Kevin McCarthy's face if that happened.
 
can you please tell me how to start a conversation.
 
It's not that the Speaker is not a Member, it's that the order of succession lists the Speaker of the House in the line of succession. In the case of the inability of the President and Vice President to continue to serve, that would mean an unelected person (except by the House Membership) would become President, a prospect that a number of people object to. In all other cases, the person has been elected to office, or appointed and confirmed by a majority of the Senate - thus vetted publicly. I was merely pointing out that there are expectations of the Speakership that are not, strictly speaking, in the Constitution.

There are practical reasons, I think, for both selection of the Speaker from the membership (the norm), and for picking an outside person. Under the present situation, the Speaker acts not only as the leader of the House itself, but of their party. I consider this, often, to be a conflict of interest, and many Speakers have taken that to extremes (Newt Gingrich and Denny Hastert come to mind). The House is supposed to represent all of the people, not just their party, and the Speaker should be someone that takes that to heart. In that regard, selection of someone from outside of the Members could further that purpose. On the other hand, I think it would be difficult, as a practical matter, for the Speaker to influence Members if they, themselves, didn't have to run for office or have a vote in Congress.
I understand the logic, but it does not seem to be addressed in our Constitution. To your post #7, “unlikely” and “upended legal expectations” have been the norm lately.
 
As the Congressional Research Office report referenced in the CS Monitor cite above, notes: "In the 1997, 2013, 2015 (both instances), 2019, and 2021 elections, votes were cast for candidates who were not then Members of the House, including, in the initial 2015 election, the 2019 election, and the 2021 election, sitting Senators. Although the Constitution does not so require, the Speaker has always been a Member of the House." (Emphasis mine)

There is a reason that the Constitution does not require the Speaker to be a Member. First, that gives the House complete control over its leadership. An "outside" Speaker could be a neutral party and "honest broker" in the operations of the House (for instance, regarding appointment of membership of committees). They would also not be vying for favor amongst the Membership as an equal. They could avoid party interests and entanglements. Those views, however, have never prevailed.
 
Looking forward to Republican Congressional candidates pledging to vote for Trump as House Speaker if they win.

I'd like to see the look on Kevin McCarthy's face if that happened.
That’s kinda where i was going with this line of thought.

Gaetz leaves, voluntarily or other, DeSantis appoints Trump, the GOP takes the House in 2022....................was another scenario.
 
can you please tell me how to start a conversation.
Click on a poster's avatar/screen name and a box will pop up then click the start a conversation button.
 
Trump would never concede to being a mere "Member" of the House. Unless he got a cut of the membership fees.
 
Trump would never concede to being a mere "Member" of the House. Unless he got a cut of the membership fees.

"Nobody thought it could be done." For a reason.
 
That’s kinda where i was going with this line of thought.

Gaetz leaves, voluntarily or other, DeSantis appoints Trump, the GOP takes the House in 2022....................was another scenario.

Impeach Biden and Harris. Trump elevates to the presidency, runs again in 2024 because he only served part of a term, and voila - pretty much "president for life."
 
Impeach Biden and Harris. Trump elevates to the presidency, runs again in 2024 because he only served part of a term, and voila - pretty much "president for life."
If the Vice President is being impeached, do they still retain a vote in the Senate in the event of a tie?
 
If the Speaker were not already an elected member, it would probably be a temporary position at best. Members vie for that position. They lobby their fellow majority members for votes at the beginning of each session. I can't envision a scenario wherein the majority party would reject one of their own to bring in an outsider, especially considering they are second only to the VP in the presidential line of succession.

As far as the presidential line of succession, here is an interesting factoid: Gerald R. Ford is the only person who has ascended to the presidency who was never elected into the line of succession. He was an obscure Michigan congressman who was nominated by Richard Nixon to replace VP Spiro Agnew when Agnew resigned amid a criminal scandal. Ford became president when Nixon resigned. When Ford ran for president as the incumbent, the electorate rejected him in favor of democrat Jimmy Carter. Many political analysts believe Ford's surprise blanket pardon of Nixon for "any crimes he may have committed" cost him the election. Ford never sought public office after his brief stint as president.
 
If the Speaker were not already an elected member, it would probably be a temporary position at best. Members vie for that position. They lobby their fellow majority members for votes at the beginning of each session. I can't envision a scenario wherein the majority party would reject one of their own to bring in an outsider, especially considering they are second only to the VP in the presidential line of succession.

As far as the presidential line of succession, here is an interesting factoid: Gerald R. Ford is the only person who has ascended to the presidency who was never elected into the line of succession. He was an obscure Michigan congressman who was nominated by Richard Nixon to replace VP Spiro Agnew when Agnew resigned amid a criminal scandal. Ford became president when Nixon resigned. When Ford ran for president as the incumbent, the electorate rejected him in favor of democrat Jimmy Carter. Many political analysts believe Ford's surprise blanket pardon of Nixon for "any crimes he may have committed" cost him the election. Ford never sought public office after his brief stint as president.
There is a school of thought that this is why an obscure Representative was elevated to the VP.
 
If the Speaker were not already an elected member, it would probably be a temporary position at best. Members vie for that position. They lobby their fellow majority members for votes at the beginning of each session. I can't envision a scenario wherein the majority party would reject one of their own to bring in an outsider, especially considering they are second only to the VP in the presidential line of succession.

As far as the presidential line of succession, here is an interesting factoid: Gerald R. Ford is the only person who has ascended to the presidency who was never elected into the line of succession. He was an obscure Michigan congressman who was nominated by Richard Nixon to replace VP Spiro Agnew when Agnew resigned amid a criminal scandal. Ford became president when Nixon resigned. When Ford ran for president as the incumbent, the electorate rejected him in favor of democrat Jimmy Carter. Many political analysts believe Ford's surprise blanket pardon of Nixon for "any crimes he may have committed" cost him the election. Ford never sought public office after his brief stint as president.

One slight correction. Ford was not that obscure. He was House Minority Leader and made a bit of a splash spearheading a campaign to impeach Justice Douglas.
 
There is a school of thought that this is why an obscure Representative was elevated to the VP.

Ford, I believe, was well-liked on both sides of the aisle, and most importantly, was considered as clean as a hound's tooth.
 
If the Vice President is being impeached, do they still retain a vote in the Senate in the event of a tie?

Are you asking if she would be able to cast a vote in her own impeachment trial? If so, as you surely know, it would take 60 votes.
 
Trump would never concede to being a mere "Member" of the House. Unless he got a cut of the membership fees.

Yes, it would have to straight to the Speakership for him.
 
Back
Top Bottom