Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 'President Pelosi' Trends on Twitter After Donald Trump Suggests Delaying the Election [View all]grantcart
(53,061 posts)37. Checking the actual Senator resolution I find that your rendering of the term of President Pro Tem
is largely more correct than the authorities I cited.
The Office of the President Pro Tem is extended but only to the end of their term as Senator. If Grassley was facing election this November, his term would not be continued.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL30960
Four years later the Senate resolved the question of the President pro tempores tenure when it
adopted a resolution originally introduced by Senator William M. Evarts of New York. As
adopted by the Senate on March 12, 1890, the resolution read:
Resolved, That it is competent for the Senate to elect a President pro tempore, who shall
hold the office during the pleasure of the Senate and until another is elected, and shall
execute the duties thereof during all future absences of the Vice-President until the Senate
otherwise order.22
That resolution is still in effect. Under its terms a President pro tempore, once elected, holds the
post continuously whether or not the Vice President is absent (although, of course, he may not
preside over the Senate unless the Vice President steps down from the chair). The tenure of the
President pro tempore ends upon the expiration of the term for which he was elected Senator, a
precedent dating back to at least 1841. He may, of course, resign, or the Senate may elect another
in his stead at its pleasure.
So your assertion that the term of the President Pro Tem of the continues past 2019 is correct but it is not an open ended extension as you implied. Grassley's term as President Pro Tem does have an end date and that date is Jan 3 2021. All in all your understanding which was not entirely correct was a lot closer to the record.
As to my doing additional searching beyond a reasonable public source, there was no evidence to suggest that it was incorrect. If you knew what the rule was why didn't you state it correctly and cite the authority.
As to the more general question of the Senate being a continuous body, you persist in the incorrect assumption that the Senate is continuous and the House is not.
As cited above in the Constitution the Senate and the House together, not separately for a "Congress" whose sessions are not continuous. They are termed events that start and finish on the same day for both houses. All of the Officers of both bodies finish the term on Jan 3rd of odd years and all of the Officers begin their terms on the same day, with the exception of the Vice President and the above noted exception of the President Pro Tem whose term ends on the last day of his Senate term.
Needless to say even though Grassley's term is continued it is unlikely he will be extended in that term because since he serves at the pleasure of the Senate he would not survive a resolution to replace. In that circumstance the Senate has established something called the President Pro Tem Emeritus for past PPT who lost the position by change of majority starting with Thurmond. Leahy, having been PPT now holds that position.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
37 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
'President Pelosi' Trends on Twitter After Donald Trump Suggests Delaying the Election [View all]
JonLP24
Jul 2020
OP
To play along here, any Democratic majority in that scenario may be fleeting.
tritsofme
Jul 2020
#12
No matter who's right in this sub-thread, it's clear that the actual outcome would be total chaos.
Towlie
Jul 2020
#23
The Senate is not now, nor has it ever been "a continuing body" a common misconception
grantcart
Jul 2020
#29
It is astonishing that people become so invested in defending facts that can be found easily
grantcart
Aug 2020
#35
Real world examples are illustrative. Following the 2002 election, Republicans retook the Senate
tritsofme
Aug 2020
#36
Checking the actual Senator resolution I find that your rendering of the term of President Pro Tem
grantcart
Aug 2020
#37