HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why does a President have...

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:44 PM

 

Why does a President have to have his cabinet choices confirmed anyhow? His VP is not

What is the rationale behind this?

Maybe there should be a right to force an impeachment of a cabinet member, but why is confirmation needed?

The cabinet works for the President who is elected by the people and is a separate branch.

Why does that person need to have congress' biased opinion to get seated?

(I can understand a federal judge, who is in office for life, but why a temporary cabinet position that is only in office as long as the President themselves.

Does President Obama get to radify who John McCain has working in his office?

34 replies, 1660 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 34 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why does a President have to have his cabinet choices confirmed anyhow? His VP is not (Original post)
graham4anything Nov 2012 OP
graham4anything Nov 2012 #1
pipoman Nov 2012 #2
elleng Nov 2012 #3
Agnosticsherbet Nov 2012 #4
graham4anything Nov 2012 #9
H2O Man Nov 2012 #12
former9thward Nov 2012 #14
graham4anything Nov 2012 #15
treestar Dec 2012 #29
graham4anything Dec 2012 #31
davidn3600 Nov 2012 #22
Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #24
graham4anything Dec 2012 #26
treestar Dec 2012 #27
davidn3600 Nov 2012 #5
graham4anything Nov 2012 #10
Angleae Dec 2012 #34
ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #6
cthulu2016 Nov 2012 #7
Sekhmets Daughter Nov 2012 #8
PoliticAverse Nov 2012 #11
hrmjustin Nov 2012 #13
graham4anything Nov 2012 #17
hrmjustin Nov 2012 #19
LeftyMom Nov 2012 #16
graham4anything Nov 2012 #18
LeftyMom Nov 2012 #20
graham4anything Nov 2012 #21
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #23
TrueBlueinCO Dec 2012 #25
msanthrope Dec 2012 #28
Proud Public Servant Dec 2012 #30
spanone Dec 2012 #32
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #33

Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:45 PM

1. edit to add-Title will be HER cabinet choice after HIllary wins in 2016.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:53 PM

2. Checks and balances

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:53 PM

3. Don't know history,

but Cabinet members run executive branch agencies; heavy duty jobs, much more than VPotus hanging w POTUS and advising her/him daily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:53 PM

4. First, VP is an elected office in accordance with the Constitution...

Second, the President's cabinet appointees must have the consent of the Senate, in accordance with the Constitution.

It is a Constitutional thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agnosticsherbet (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:57 PM

9. but why? What is the rationale for it?

 

Jefferson said all MEN (not women) are created equal
Why did he not say ALL are created equal

Why did he keep slaves? And abuse the female one?

Just because "it is in the constitution" doesn't cut it with me, because of what Jefferson did and not wrote.

I can understand a cabinet person needs to speak to the Senate every once in a while, but why to confirm?

And why do they need to be official titles anyhow.

Why not just let Joe Biden do the work of the SOS for the next 4 years and not put up a candidate should Ms. Rice not be confirmed.

better than losing a senate seat to add to the gridlock or worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:06 PM

12. Why are circles round?

I mean, why aren't the square?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:11 PM

14. Jefferson had little to do with the Constitution.

He was in Europe when it was being written and he didn't even sign it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #14)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:17 PM

15. the declaration, whatever.

 

I know he didn't need to do any work in his mansion. He owned people for those jobs.
(oh wait, they weren't considered people back then, were they?)

all are not equal according to Thomas Jefferson.
Just "men" as conforming to whomever Jefferson and the others thought qualified then.

When once thinks of those leaders, that is the first thing that always comes to my mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:42 PM

29. Then you would not accept the Constitution

no matter who you think wrote it, as it necessarily would have been an 18th century white man.

Your thinking is so illogical it's practically dangerous. You don't appear to get the concept of the rule of law.

The Founders wrote that the advisors need to be confirmed with advice and consent of the Senate, and they had their reasons for that. To change it requires a Constitutional Amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:18 PM

31. ah!!! So you agree ALL the later amendments are as equal as the original. BINGO!!!

 

I hate Gotcha's.

but this means ALL amendments are equal

and it means ANY amendment that once was can be gone.

THANKS for proving my point.

It truly is a great big beautiful tomorrow!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:33 PM

22. "One small step for man. One giant leap for mankind."

Was Neil Armstrong sexist too?

Under the dictionary for "man":
1. an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2. a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex.
3. the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind:
4. a human being; person:
5. a husband.

Its just one of the quirks of the English language.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:27 PM

24. At the time, men was a word that stood for the species...

and Jefferson lived within a patriarchal system and never considered if his wording my be insensitive to women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agnosticsherbet (Reply #24)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:39 PM

26. Did that mean slaves were equal to men who weren't slaves? oops. NO it didn't

 

they were not.

all men are created equal, but only the ones Thomas Jefferson deemed to be of THE he sang.

I would say Thomas Jefferson probably committed the biggest (enter word of your choosing here MadLib(c) style) mankind has known

and they accused BC of parsing his words back when they wasted billions doing that thingy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:40 PM

27. The Constitution is still the law of the land

To be changed it has to be amended, regardless of the personal lives of those who wrote it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:53 PM

5. The Constitution requires it

Article 2, Section 2 states that Presidential appointments must be confirmed by the US Senate.

It's part of the checks and balances. The founders did not want the President to act unilaterally. They wanted to assure the people he appoints to the courts and the high offices are sufficiently qualified.

Otherwise you get into situations where a President stands handing out these jobs, to his friends, family, or someone that paid him off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:02 PM

10. The courts are one thing. The cabinet is another

 

They already have the ability to impeach the president if it goes over the top

And all Presidents do give these jobs to someoen they trust anyhow

and the republicans have that Sheldon A. or Grover N. who well fit the pay off definition and are not in office

(and they are called powerbrokers, which they had back in Washington's day too.)

Checks and balances come every 4 years at election time.

(and yes, I know it's in the constiution, that is not the point)

and the VP is only in between presidential elections. Which is why Joe Biden would never get the official title of SOS, but he could act as one the next four years with no loss to anything at all. (except to the haters of Obama and Biden).or those with other angles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:44 AM

34. Article 2, Section 2 is not limited to court appointments.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Offi cers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:54 PM

6. Constitution 101, take the course

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:54 PM

7. When appointed, the VP is confirmed

Since the VP is usually elected he isn't confirmed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 07:55 PM

8. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.

Called the Appointments Clause and is the source of the phrase "Advice and Consent" of the senate for presidential appointments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:05 PM

11. It's ultimately about how much power a President should have..

Article II, Section 2, paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution states:

shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advice_and_consent

Extensive background on the 'advise and consent' issue:
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol29_No1_White.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:10 PM

13. I think it works. It means that the President has to nominate someone that can garner enough votes

to be seated in the cabinet. The idea that the president can just put someone in there without any feedback is troubling to me. I say this because the gop will get the presidency again someday, and i want those people to have to go to the senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:19 PM

17. andif the GOP owns the senate at that time, those people will pass

 

especially as the Dems are going to do away with the fillibuster according to reports
leaving a GOP senate to do as they please(which is why they so desparately are the single largest group shouting out for John Kerry to be SOS at this time, to give his seat back to them)

except for this board, and Kerry's people, I can't say I hear anyone in the USA wanting him to leave the senate and become the new SOS.

But I do hear all republicans/tea/libertarians are itching for just that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #17)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:24 PM

19. I like Kerry, but i want Obama to pick a fight with Susan Rice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:19 PM

16. They covered this in grade school.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #16)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:21 PM

18. they also taught us the Declaration

 

the one that says All Men are created equal (except those that are not, and it forgot to mention Women)

yup, that was some truth, wasn't it???
talking about parsing words

and not one person in that room sought a different wording? WTF was up with that???

and we call those people heroes???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #18)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:24 PM

20. It's a bit early to be incoherent, even on a Friday night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #20)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 08:29 PM

21. How is that being incoherent? Were you not taught the Declaration too? And what it said?

 

Did you not ever question the line

"All men are created equal"

It specifically does not say ALL. Nor does it mention women.

It specifically say ALL MEN

the great Thomas Jefferson and the other (old boy network) did not believe ALL.
they parsed their words specific to ALL MEN
it was not just phrasing, it was on purpose. Being that ALL were obviously not Equal and slavery existed for many decades afterward, didn't it?

Til the 13th clarified some of that wording.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 09:20 PM

23. It's required by the constitution

 

Cabinet positions are established by law, thus Senate confirmation is required under Article II., Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:31 PM

25. well, VP is an elected position...

 

you may recall voting for Obama/Biden in the past election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:41 PM

28. James Madison thought it was a good idea. Article II, Section 2. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:49 PM

30. It's simple, really

First, that Congress was clearly conceived of by the founders as being the most important and powerful branch of government; and second, that the few original Cabinet offices were conceived of as being significant positions, like European ministries. Senatorial confirmation was a way to make sure such positions were "checked" by the Congress as part of the overall system of checks and balances; they were, in fact, a way of making sure the President couldn't do too much on his own (as European monarchs had done with regard to their national legislatures). It may also be helpful to remember that the original Cabinet was just the Big Four: State, War, Treasury, and Justice; it's easy to see why one might not want the execute branch to have exclusive control over who sat in those chairs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:23 PM

32. i think it's a good idea when it's not 100% driven by politics. today it's 130% driven by politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:25 PM

33. They occupy offices and departments created by Congress and exercise powers

delegated by Congress and/or dependent on Congressional funding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread