How Much Power Does the U.S. Vice President Really Have?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Power
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the powers and roles of the U.S. Vice President, particularly in the context of recent statements made by Sarah Palin and the historical actions of Dick Cheney. Participants explore constitutional interpretations, the implications of vice presidential authority, and the potential for subversion of constitutional principles.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the Constitution allows for flexibility in the vice presidency, suggesting that a vice president can exert more authority if they choose to work closely with the Senate and the president.
  • Others contend that the primary role of the vice president is to support the president and preside over the Senate only in tie votes, emphasizing that any expansion of power is a misinterpretation of the Constitution.
  • Concerns are raised about Palin's understanding of the Constitution, with some suggesting she may be influenced by Cheney's approach to the vice presidency.
  • Participants express skepticism regarding the intentions behind Palin's statements, questioning whether they indicate a reckless disregard for constitutional norms or a lack of understanding.
  • Some participants reflect on the historical influence of previous vice presidents, noting that figures like Lyndon Johnson and Al Gore were adept at navigating legislative processes.
  • There is speculation about the potential for legal repercussions for Cheney, with discussions about presidential pardons and their implications for accountability.
  • Humor is introduced in the discussion, with references to Cheney's public visibility and physical appearance, indicating a mix of serious and light-hearted commentary.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; instead, multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the vice presidency, the implications of Palin's statements, and the historical context of vice presidential power.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying interpretations of constitutional authority, differing opinions on the motivations behind political statements, and unresolved questions about the implications of vice presidential actions.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,213
Reaction score
2,660
PALIN:... I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are. John McCain and I have had good conversations about where I would lead with his agenda.

...PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation. And it is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as a governor, but earlier on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to good use in the White House also.

IFILL: Vice President Cheney's interpretation of the vice presidency?

BIDEN: Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.

And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit.

The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he's part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive and look where it has gotten us. It has been very dangerous...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/

I agree 100% with Biden. Also, Cheney should probably be in jail.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ivan Seeking said:
Also, Cheney should probably be in jail.

Maybe if a new party gets power, he will be?
 
This is the power that Cheney sought to expand and so too apparently does Palin.
US_Constitution-Article_I said:
The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.
...
The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States.
Gosh. And she doesn't even have to be there either.
 
The pundits dismissed this as Palin rambling. Was it? She was pretty explicit.

Has Palin announced her intention to subvert the Constitution, as Bush and Cheney have done. If so, she is by definition an enemy of the United States. If not, then her recklessness is staggering.

Her husband was involved with that group in Alaska that wanted to secede from the Union. Maybe neither one of them support the Constitution. Is she more interested in power than the rule of law? Based on Palin's statement, so it would seem.

Is this done with McCain's blessing? Has the old boy decided that he knows what's best and it can't be left to that pesky document?
 
Last edited:
Ivan Seeking said:
The pundits dismissed this as Palin rambling. Was it? She was pretty explicit.

Has Palin announced her intention to subvert the Constitution, as Bush and Cheney have done. If so, she is by definition an enemy of the United States. If not, then her recklessness is staggering.

No I think she's not against it so much as not understanding it. I think in her warped view, being spoon fed by the Cheney drones, that she fundamentally doesn't understand the dynamics of the Constitution and is fantasizing about some vain-glorious role for herself in an Administration that she will only ever be able to dream about until being sent back to Alaska a loser November 4.
 
I seem to recall that Lyndon Johnson, Walter Mondale and Al Gore all really knew their way around the Hill...might've even encouraged a few votes...here and there along the way?

No argument that Cheney was influential, Agnew (real crook), Ford, and Bush 1, as well. No shrinking violets in that group either.

Plus, I'm sure Biden knows more about Senate protocol than Palin...you know...how things are SUPPOSED TO BE...how things are done...he's certainly been part of (IT) for a long time?

As for Palin and a Constitutional conspiracy(?)...WOW! I'm speechless.

And to think I've been worried about Obama...not knowing much about his experience and affiliations and all? But since the debate, Biden has certainly addressed that concern...if (God forbid) something happened to Obama...Biden assured us he wouldn't do ANYTHING different than Obama has specified...WOW, again. There you go Joe...
 
WhoWee said:
As for Palin and a Constitutional conspiracy(?)...WOW! I'm speechless.

I'm not suggesting a conspiracy so much as a reckless disregard, as we have seen for the last six or seven years. Edit: But subversion is subversion. The law doesn't make dinstictions based on motive. The enemy is the enemy and THAT is clearly defined. Every soldier and politician swears to defend the Constitution.

In fact, I don't even have to suggest it. She has already demonstrated that much [a reckless disregard]. The question is: How deep does it go? She did belabor the point. And after what we have seen, I am amazed by almost nothing anymore.

Has McCain corrected her statements? Has he renounced her stated intentions?
 
Last edited:
Ivan Seeking said:
Also, Cheney should probably be in...sh has the authority as President to do that.
 
wildman said:
According to my neighbor (a professor of constitutional law), he won't go to jail. Bush will pardon him in advance for any crimes known or unknown. The professor said that believe it or not, Bush has the authority as President to do that.

Sure he has the power to do that but without any active investigation against him it would surely raise concerns that there might be something worth investigating.

Moreover, once he receives a Pardon, he has no power to invoke the 5th Amendment against self incrimination and can be compelled to answer all manner of questions against others.

Granting a Pardon is a careful what you wish for kind of thing.
 
  • #10
Why is it you never hear or see a peep out of cheney?

Seriously. When was the last time you saw the guy on tv, or anything about him at all?
 
  • #11
He's the fattest, whitest Ninja in history.

Well... besides Chris Farley, that is.
 
  • #12
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K