Palin in Charge of the Senate?

In her debate with Joe Biden, Palin was asked about the vice president’s role in government. She said she agreed with Dick Cheney that “we have a lot of flexibility in there” under the Constitution. And she declared that she was “thankful that the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president also, if that vice president so chose to exert it.”

Yesterday, in an interview with KUSA, Palin expanded on her dreams of her fantasy job . . . (http://www.9news.com/video/default.aspx?aid=63586)

"A vice president has a really great job because not only are they there to support the president’s agenda, they’re like the team member, the teammate to that president, but also they’re in charge of the United State Senate. So if they want to, they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom. And it’s a great job, and I look forward to having that job.”


Remember Cheney . . .

"claimed he wasn't a member the executive branch of the government, but was a member of the legislative branch. That was because he's the president of the Senate, and therefore he felt he wasn't subject to the presidential order giving the National Archives' Information Security Oversight Office the right to make sure that Cheney and his office have demonstrated proper security safeguards. By the end of the week, he was back claiming that he was actually the vice president, and therefore could claim executive privilege once again as he rejected demands from Congress about information regarding the firing of U.S. attorneys . . ."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/03/opinion/garver/main3011862.shtml


and, again this year . . .

Cheney joined a brief filed by 305 lawmakers in the Supreme Court case over the constitutionality of the District's gun control laws. A federal appeals court struck down the gun ban -- the most far-reaching in the nation -- as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The District appealed the case, which is scheduled to be argued on March 18; Mr. Cheney and the lawmakers urged the justices to uphold the lower court ruling, which concludes that "once it is determined -- as we have done -- that handguns are 'Arms' referred to in the Second Amendment, it is not open to the District to ban them."

The problem is, Mr. Cheney's position put him at odds with the administration's official stance in the case. Rather than rubber-stamp the lower court decision, Solicitor General Paul D. Clement argued that the Second Amendment bestows an individual right but that "protection of individual rights does not render all laws limiting gun ownership automatically invalid." Mr. Clement worried that adopting the rationale of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit could invalidate a host of federal gun control laws; he argued for a more flexible approach that would, for example, allow a court to consider public safety concerns when analyzing the constitutionality of a firearms regulation. The brief was carefully written, thoughtful and apparently not radical enough for Mr. Cheney.

How did Mr. Cheney manage to weigh in against an administration he is a part of? By signing on to the lawmakers' brief as "President of the Senate." Mr. Cheney's move appears unprecedented; it is irresponsible, selfish and unnecessary. The president of the Senate seems to have forgotten that it is important for the executive branch to speak with one voice in legal matters to provide clarity and consistency. The gun lawsuit doesn't impinge on any special duties of the president of the Senate; it is highly likely that justices would have taken notice of the lawmakers' brief even without the vice president's involvement. Moreover, when disputes within the executive branch arise, as they have with regard to affirmative action or regulatory cases, the solicitor general and ultimately the president make the call about where the government stands.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/23/AR2008022300757_pf.html



one view on Palin's fantasy job . . .


"The Senate Rules shift power in a number of ways, most famously by allowing for filibusters, but they are upheld primarily by tradition.

Senate Rule XXII allows for filibusters by requiring the support of a supermajority of 60 Senators to bring "cloture" to an ongoing debate. Palin, as President of the Senate, could declare Rule XXII "unconstitutional" and decree that, in the case of judicial appointments, a simple majority will be sufficient to cut off debate.

In point of fact, a Vice President acting as President of the Senate could scrap the Senate's entire set of procedural rules and write new ones of her own, by Constitutional fiat.

http://www.culture11.com/node/32636


John Dean weighs in . . .

The Vice President's very limited but vital roles are set forth in the Constitution. He is the next in succession to become President, should there be a vacancy or should the president suffer from mental or physical inability to serve. And he is the president of the Senate, which means he can preside over the Senate but under the Senate Rules, he cannot take part in debate, and under the Constitution, he can only vote to break a tie.

In the event of a vacancy in the office of the president, under Article II and the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, the Vice President becomes the Acting President. Also under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, the Vice President, when acting with a majority of the Cabinet, can also declare the president is "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office." If he so declares, then after so informing Congress, the Vice President becomes Acting President until the President notifies Congress that he is fine; if there is a dispute, the Congress resolves it.

The only other Constitutional duty of the Vice President is that set forth in Article I, Section 3, clause 4, which makes the Vice President the "President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided." Not since the nation's second Vice President, Thomas Jefferson, decided it was a waste of time to preside over the Senate has any Vice President done so -- other than to break ties or for ceremonial events, such as the State of the Union or the tallying of electoral college votes.

Since 1947, the Vice President has been given a number of statutory duties, when President Truman recommended, and the Congress agreed, that the Vice President should be a member of the National Security Council. This, however, is the most significant of his statutory assignments.

Thus, beyond the limited constitutional responsibilities, and the few statutory tasks, the Vice President's role comes down to whatever the President assigns him. Vice Presidents can have no role greater than the assignments given by the president -- or in the case of Dick Cheney, whatever he has been able to convince the President he can appropriately handle for him.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070629.html


so, could a President McCain direct Palin to camp out in the Senate and interfere with procedural rules and meddle with their agenda? That would make Palin's bleating a bit more concerning.

the Standing Rules of the Senate allow any procedural ruling by the presiding officer to be appealed to the Senate, meaning that any ruling she made could/would be overruled by a simple majority vote of the Senate.

Is there any mischief you believe she could get away with by interjecting herself in the day-to-day in the Senate?

by displaying her ignorance on a regular basis. Even the repubs wouldn't want her there, since they realize that what goes around comes around -- that one day there might be a Democratic VP and a republican controlled Senate.