Enumerated Powers of Congress

“Government has an inborn tendency to grow. And, left to itself, it will grow beyond the control of the people. Only constant complaint by the people will inhibit its growth.”

Ronald Reagan, Address to the Comstock Club, Sacramento, August 6. 1973

Section 8 of Article 1 of the US Constitution assigns certain functions and powers to the Congress. This Section is commonly known as the Enumeration of Powers. Because this Section gives a list of the enumerated powers, I will cover some of the concepts needed to understand how the power structure works in the Congress. You may want to refer back to this post as we look at all the powers on the enumerated list.

Political power, within the concept of federalism, was divided between the two levels of government. The national government was to have limited and enumerated powers. The powers not given to the national government remained with the states as reserved power. Additionally, the national power was divided between the three branches of government with a system of checks and balances in place.

According to Dr. James McClellan in his book, Liberty, Order, and Justice, the powers of Congress can be classified as:

1. Enumerated or delegated – listed. The word delegated means that some of these were powers assigned by the states to the federal government.

2. Implied – expressed indirectly. This is done with the use of the “Necessary and Proper Clause”, which is also in Section 8. I will discuss it in a later post. This clause expands the enumerated powers of Congress. An example would be since Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce, then it could make a law regulating shipping of materials from one state to another.

3. Prohibited – forbidden by authority

4. Inherited – powers inherited from the British Parliament and earlier state constitutions. (As in Article 1, Section 5, which is modeled after British Parliament with some important changes)

Following along with Dr. McClellan, the powers can be further divided into exclusive and concurrent. Exclusive means belonging only to the Congress (the power to declare war). Concurrent powers are powers shared with the Executive Branch or with the States. (Congress shares with the President the power to make war. It shares income tax power with the States.)

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay – authors of the Federalist Papers

James Madison strongly believed in the importance of reserving as much power as possible to the States and to the people (we the people). Writing as Publius in Federalist 45, he writes:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former (federal powers) will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce… The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

Overall, in Article 1, Section 8, we the people empower Congress with certain specified powers so that they can govern effectually.

The benefit to we the people is that we have a Congress strong enough to make decisions and govern, while at the same time limiting the powers of Congress by reserving numerous powers to the States and to the people.

In the next post, I will discuss Article 1, Section 8, beginning with Clause 1 to point out the benefits of the first principles in your life.

God bless you!

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

McClellan, James. Liberty, Order, and Justice. Indianapolis, Liberty Fund, Inc., 2000

Skousen, W. Cleon. The 5000 Year Leap. National Center for Constitutional Studies, 2006

Making Resolutions

 

“Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the president of the United States; and before the Same shall take effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be re-passed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.” Article 1, Section 7, Clause 3, US Constitution

According to Webster’s Dictionary, a resolution can be defined as “a statement of the feelings, wishes, or decisions of a group”. Another definition is “something decided on”.

According to Findlay’s Your Rugged Constitution, the Presentment of Resolutions Clause acts as a “governor”. A governor is a part of a machine that keeps the machine from going too fast. This presidential veto power prevents the Congress from too hasty action.

This clause is telling us that any order, resolution, or vote, which occurs in the Congress, must come to the President’s desk for approval. If he would not approve, he could send it back to the Congress where it would be debated again and put forward for another vote, this time requiring a two-thirds majority of each House to pass.

According to Heritage Foundation’s David F. Forte, Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, there are three types of resolutions in Congress. This clause applies to those resolutions that, if passed, would result in law.

The threes types of resolutions are joint resolutions, concurrent resolutions, and simple resolutions.

Joint Resolutions need to be presented to the President because they are intended to have the force of a law. An example would be declaration of war. Joint resolutions usually cover a single topic.

An exception would be a Constitutional Amendment. This would require a joint resolution, but under Article 5 of the Constitution, the amendment would go the states, where it would have to be approved by three-fourths of the state legislatures of the several states. There is no presidential involvement in a Constitutional Amendment.

Concurrent Resolutions are those that deal with procedural issues. These would be issues such as deciding when to adjourn, expressing the “sense of Congress” on public policy topics, or setting goals dealing with monetary funds. These are not “law” and do not have to be presented to the president.

Simple Resolutions apply to operations of a single House of Congress. These would concern things like imposing censure on a member, setting spending limits on a committee, or expressing the viewpoint of one House on an issue. Obviously, these resolutions do not have to be presented to the president.

With Article 1, Section 7, Clause 3, we the people give the President the responsibility of signing other measures in addition to bills that have passed both Houses of Congress.

The benefit to we the people is that we have in place another important part of the checks and balances in the federal government. Additionally, having the President sign these documents slows the process thus prevent hasty decisions by Congress.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org

Webster’s Dictionary

How Does a Bill Become a Law?

I’m Just a Bill by kilroyart.deviantart.com

“Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.”  Article 1, Section 7, Clause 2

This is a rather long clause in the document.  This clause is called the Presentment Clause.  Apparently, the Founders wanted to spell out the details of this process so there would be few questions of their intention.

When a bill is presented in one of the Houses of Congress, it must pass that House and then be sent to the other house for another vote.  You may hear the term “bicameral” in speaking of the two houses.  This means that we have two houses involved in the legislative process.  If only one House was involved, the term used would be “unicameral”.

Following both Houses passing legislation, the bill goes to the President for his signature.  If he signs it, it becomes law.  If he does not sign it, he must return it to the House where it originated with his objections.  This information is to be entered into the Journal for that House.  If he does not sign the bill but returns it, this is known as a veto, although the word “veto” is not in the document.

The Congress may then reconsider the bill.  If it passes the House where it originated by a 2/3’s vote; it can then be sent to the other House where it will be reconsidered.  If it passes that House by a 2/3’s vote, it would become law.  These votes must be cast as “yeas or Nays” and the names of those voting for and against must be entered into the Journal.

If the President does not return the bill to either House within 10 days (not counting Sundays) then the bill would become law.

The very last phrase of this clause is what we commonly call the “Pocket Veto”.  This happens when the President holds the bill (puts it in his pocket), and Congress adjourns, thus preventing him from returning the bill.  The Congress has by its adjournment prevented the President from returning it.  That bill will not become law.  This phrase is known as the Pocket Veto Clause.

According to David Forte, Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, there are three types of adjournments that the Congress can do:

1. Sine die – This is when Congress ends and the newly elected Congress will start a session.
2. Intersession – This is adjournment between two sessions of the same Congress.
3. Intra-session – This is when Congress takes a break within a session.

Much has been written and litigated about these different types of adjournment and whether or not certain pocket vetoes are valid.  It seems that the courts have generally upheld that a pocket veto can occur in any of these situations.   Today, when a President does a pocket veto, he does it with a “protective return” in case there is a question in the courts at a later date.

We the people give the President the right to approve or disapprove all bills.  We give the Congress the responsibility of coming up with a 2/3’s vote to override a Presidential veto.

The benefit to us is that we have checks and balances between both Houses of Congress and the executive.  This also prevents hasty action be either Congress or the Executive branch.

This is a video that will sum up this process for you:

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

www.wikipedia.com

www.heritage.org

Origination Clause

 

“All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.” Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1, US Constitution

The Origination clause allows the House of Representatives to introduce any bills that have to do with revenue. Revenue means money collected by a government (as taxes).

The Founder’s intention in making the decisions for taxes and collection of revenue to come from the House was that the Representatives are the closest to the people who elected them. They should be the most aware of the needs of the people. They would also then be directly accountable to the people for any unpopular taxes.

James Madison

As James Madison wrote in Federalist 58:
“The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose the supplies requisite for the support of the government…. This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect, every just and salutary measure.”

Some scholars feel that the fact that the Senate can make proposals for changes to these bills weakens the power of this function of the House.

The Senate in recent times has developed a procedure known as “gut-and-amend”. In this procedure, the Senate removes the content of the bill that was proposed and sometimes keeps the title. In this way, the content of the bill has come from the Senate instead of from the House. The content could have come via the Senate from appointees of the Executive branch (i.e. the Treasury Department).

An example of a bill that was put through “gut-and-amend” in the Senate was the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as “Obamacare”.

Chief Justice John Roberts

Chief Justice John Roberts, in his opinion June 28, 2012 as to the constitutionality of the bill, opined that the mandate to purchase health insurance is indeed a tax.

“Such an analysis suggests that the shared responsibility payment may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax. The payment is not so high that there is really no choice but to buy health insurance; the payment is not limited to willful violations, as penalties for unlawful acts often are; and the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation. Cf. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U. S. 20, 36–37. None of this is to say that payment is not intended to induce the purchase of health insurance. But the mandate need not be read to declare that failing to do so is unlawful. Neither the Affordable Care Act nor any other law attaches negative legal consequences to not buying health insurance, beyond requiring a payment to the IRS. And Congress’s choice of language—stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”—does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct. It may also be read as imposing a tax on those who go without insurance.”

There is a group called the Pacific Legal Foundation who is filing a lawsuit against the government over the Affordable Care Act saying that since the mandate is a tax, then the bill should have originated in the House and thus it is unconstitutional.

Please see the articles below for further information on the lawsuit based on the Origination Clause.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/31/obamacare-lawsuit-over-health-care-tax-will-test-c/?page=1

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/02/the-lawsuit-that-might-kill-obamacare/

Under Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1, we the people gave the House of Representatives the authority to originate bills to raise money via taxes. The House of Representatives have the closest connection to the people.

The benefit to we the people is that we can hold our Representative accountable and either continue their office in the House, or remove them if we feel they are not handling taxation as we think they should.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org

http://www.wikipedia.com

Webster’s Dictionary

Attempts to Prevent Corruption

Senators taking oath of office

“*No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and **no Person holding any office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his continuance in Office.” Article 1, Section 6, Clause 2 US Constitution

This clause was designed to address the potential for corruption in government appointments.

* Emolument or Ineligibility or Sinecure Clause

Senators or Representatives cannot resign from Congress to take an appointment to a newly created or higher paying position in the Executive Branch. They have to wait until the end of their term before they can resign.

This was designed to discourage the Executive Branch from enticing members of Congress to other positions. These positions could have been created or placed at a higher salary by the current Congress. So it could appear that the Congress created or improved that position for one of its members.

The word “emolument” means the “returns arising from office or employment usually in the form of compensation or perquisites”. (Webster’s Online)

The word “sinecure” means “an office or position that requires little or no work and that usually provides an income”. (Webster’s Online)

The Ineligibility Clause can be bypassed by a procedure called the Saxbe Fix. What can happen is that Congress can roll the salary for the position back to the level of the Congressperson’s current salary to allow him to take the position.

Here is an example of the Saxbe Fix in recent times: http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/how-much-does/secretary-of-state-salary/

** Incompatibility Clause

This clause was designed to preserve the independence of the executive and legislative branches.

No person holding an appointed office under the executive branch may serve in the Senate or the House of Representatives at the same time.

We the people give instructions that prevent a Congressperson from holding an office that they may have helped create or an office where the salary may have been increased during the Congressperson’s time in office.

The benefit to us is that we are protected from having Congress make high-paying positions for their own members. We also avoid undue influence on the executive branch by members of Congress. It is a means by which the independence of the executive and legislative branches can be preserved.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org

http://www.wikipedia.com

Online Webster’s Dictionary

Compensation for Congress

“*The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. **They shall in all cases except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from arrest during their Attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and ***for any Speech or Debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.” Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1, US Constitution

* The Compensation Clause

The first part of this clause is known as the “Compensation Clause”. When the document was founded, there was discussion about whether or not the Representatives and Senators should be paid for service. There was concern that if they were not paid, they might be more likely to turn to corruption for compensation. As stated by Joseph Story in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, “they might be compelled by their necessities, or tempted by their wants, to yield up their independence, and perhaps their integrity, to the allurements of the corrupt, or the opulent.”

As stated by Adrian Vermeule, John H. Watson, Jr. Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, “Thus, supporters of the federal legislative salary argued that providing no salary would not attract candidates motivated only by a sense of duty, but would instead permit only wealthy candidates, creating a de facto legislative plutocracy.”

So it was decided that they should be paid for their services. The additional question was from whom should they receive their pay. The Founders felt that if the individual states paid them, as they were paid under the Articles of Confederation, then they would be more dependent on the state, and less focused on federal issues. The Founders decided that they should be paid from the United States Treasury.

In more recent times, the question has been about pay raises. The Congress sets its own pay rate. The 27th Amendment makes it so that Congressional pay raises take place in the next term from when the pay raise was approved.

The current salary for a Senator or Congressman is $174,000. For the Majority and Minority Leader of each House the salary is $193,400. For the Speaker of the House, the salary is $223,500. For more information on the compensation for the Congress, please see: http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=’0E%2C*PL%5B%3D%23P%20%20

** Privilege from Arrest

The next part of this clause discusses the fact that the Congressperson is immune from arrest in civil matters while in session of Congress and when traveling to and from a session. This language was also used in the British Parliament. It was thought to be a way to prevent the executive branch from having a Member arrested who might be about to cast a vote against their wishes. However, according to David F. Forte, Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshal College of Law, “The Supreme Court, applying the Framers’ intent, later declared that the clause also did not provide any privilege from civil process… Hence, civil litigants can compel Members of Congress to appear in a court of proper jurisdiction to defend against civil actions. Furthermore, the Court has so narrowly interpreted the clause that Members of Congress may even be compelled by subpoena to testify in criminal and civil actions while Congress is in session.”

*** Speech and Debate Clause

The third part of this clause is known as the Speech and Debate Clause. The purpose of this statement is to protect the independence of Congress when exercising the legislative responsibilities assigned to it by the Constitution. It would prevent a Congressperson from being charged with libel or slander while speaking in their House of Congress. However, the rules do not necessarily apply if the Congressperson was to publish this information in a place other than the Congress.

In Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1, we the people give your Congressperson:
• Salaries and other compensation
• Freedom from arrest while doing the work of the government
• Freedom from fear of charges of libel or slander or other charges while speaking in the Congress

The benefit to we the people is that the Congressperson can feel free to express their thoughts while doing the work we hired them to do as well as freedom from fear of being arrested to be prevented from speaking for the people who hired them.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/25/compensation-clause

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/26/privilege-from-arrest

www. Wikipedia.com

Conducting Business in the Congress

United States Capitol Building

Section 5 of Article 1 deals with procedural information. It directs how the day-to-day business in the Congress is to be conducted.

“Each House shall be the Judge of Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of Absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.” Article 1, Section 5, Clause 1, US Constitution

Both the Senate and the House are responsible to look at election returns and results and determine that the members meet the qualifications set forth in the Constitution for them to hold office. If a member were not qualified (i.e. did not meet the age requirement), the Senate or the House would have to decide what action to take.

This clause also states that a majority constitutes a quorum to do business. A “majority” means that there is one more than 50% of the members present. A “quorum” means the number of members of a group needed at a meeting in order for business to be legally carried on. So, for the Senate 51 members should be present, and for the House 218 member should be present in order for business to be done.

This clause also tells us that a lesser number of members can be present when business is adjourned. A smaller number can also be present when the Congress compels (insists upon attendance by exerting pressure) on absent members of the body.

“Each House may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.” Article 1, Section 5, Clause 2, US Constitution

Both the Senate and the House of Representatives may determine its own rules (Quorum would be needed). Each House may also punish its members for disorderly behavior. It would require a two-thirds majority to expel a member. A two-thirds majority is an example of a “super majority”. A super majority is any majority that is greater than the simple majority (50% + 1). Common super majorities are 2/3 and 3/5.

“Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, as the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.” Article 1, Section 5, Clause 3, US Constitution

Each House must keep a journal of its proceedings. If one fifth of those present for a vote want the Journal to include whether they voted Yea or Nay, this can be done (If there is a quorum present). The Journal is called the Congressional Record. You can access it online at: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/LegislativeData.php?&n=Record&c=111

Another interesting document available on line is the Federal Register. You can find this at: https://www.federalregister.gov/. It contains notices, rules, final rules, and presidential documents.

“Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.” Article 1, Section 5, Clause 4, US Constitution

When the Congress is in session, neither House can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other House. Sometimes, one House will hold a “pro forma” session. This can be done every three days. “pro forma” means “as a matter of form”. The House doing this will hold a short meeting every three days not to conduct business, but to fulfill the Constitutional requirement.

In Section 5 of Article 1, we the people give Congress the right to decide the eligibility of its members, details about how business should be conducted, and the authority to make its own rules and regulations.

The benefit to we the people is that:
• We have Congress-persons who are qualified to be members
• There are rules in place to prevent delay of business by absences of members
• The complete record of events in Congress available to the public via The Congressional Record
• We also have the knowledge available to us as to how our Congress-person voted on various issues

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

US Constitution

Webster’s Dictionary for Students, 2007

Wikipedia, Article One of the United States Constitution

How Often Should the Congress Assemble?

”The Congress shall assemble at least once every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall be law appoint a different day. US Constitution, Article 1, Section 4, Clause 2

This clause was changed by the 20th Amendment, Section 2. This states, “ The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3rd day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.”

This section was originally designed to make sure that the Congress met at least once per year. Prior to instituting the new Constitution, while still under the Articles of Confederation, the legislature decided to start the first session of the Congress under the new Constitution on March 4, 1789. This meant that every other year, the newly elected members would not take the oath of office until March. But the Congress was required to meet in December. This allowed a gap in time where a “lame duck” session of Congress could occur. Lame duck means that the Congress could meet and make laws with the people who had been voted out of office in November in attendance and voting.

Although Congress could have prevented this by passing a law to change the date, they instead proposed the 20th Amendment to wrap up any loose ends such as the fact that those in office when this change occurred would have their terms shortened by a few months and to keep the text of the Constitution consistent. The Amendment kept the requirement that the Congress meets at least once per year.

Lame duck sessions of Congress do still occur, but they are not “required” by the Constitution. The time frame of the lame duck session now could be from post-election November until Jan. 3rd every other year.

Currently, according the answers.yahoo.com, the Senate is in session over the last 9 years an average of 140 days per year, with the House in session an average of 130 days per year over the same time period.

The benefit to “we the people” is that Congress must assemble at least once each year to take care of legislative issues.  The second benefit is that the 20th Amendment shortened the potential amount of time for a lame duck session of Congress to occur.

“One thing our Founding Fathers could not foresee… was a nation governed by professional politicians who had vested interest in getting reelected. They probably envisioned a fellow serving a couple of hitches and the looking… forward to getting back to the farm.”

Ronald Reagan, Meeting the Students, taping for television, Sacramento, September 17, 1973

References:

Answer.yahoo.com

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

US Constitution

Wikipedia, Article One of the United States Constitution

Senate’s Role in Impeachments

“One legislator accused me of having a 19th century attitude on law and order. That is a totally false charge. I have an 18th century attitude. That is when the Founding Fathers made it clear that the safety of law-abiding citizens should be one of government’s primary concerns.”
Ronald Reagan –Address to the Republican State Central Committee Convention, San Diego, September 7, 1973

“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on an oath of Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.” US Constitution Article 1, Section 3 Clause 6

Impeachment means to charge a public figure formally with misconduct in office. In order for a public official to be removed from office, two steps must occur. First, the House of Representatives must impeach (accuse the elected official of a crime {i.e. treason, bribery, perjury, obstruction of justice, etc.}) and then the Senate must convict the person and vote to remove the elected official from office. For further discussion of impeachment, please see the post “The Speaker of the House” from March 6, 2013.

In the Senate, the elected official who was charged with a crime will have a trial. The Senate will pass judgment. The Senators will take an oath of affirmation. The Vice President will preside as President of the Senate, unless the person being tried is the President of the United States. In that case, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will preside. This allowance was made initially to prevent a situation where the Vice President was presiding over a trial where the outcome could make him President. In more “modern” times, it prevents the Vice President, who would probably be sympathetic to the President on trial, from limiting the independence of the Senate in deciding such an important issue.

During impeachment trials, the Constitution requires that two-thirds of the Senate members be present. This indicates the importance of this vote. On other issues, the decision of the Senate may require two-thirds of the votes cast by the members who are present.

With Clause 6, we the people give the Senate the power to decide if elected officials have violated the trust of the people.

The benefit to us is that we should get serious, mature, and firm judgment from the Senate members. Additionally, we have the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as an unbiased Judge when the President of the United States stands accused.

“Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to remove from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishment, according to law.” US Constitution, Article 1, Section 3, Clause 7

This clause limits the penalties that the Senate may impose if they find the person guilty of a crime against the people. The Senate may remove the elected official from office and prevent that person from holding public office in the future.

The person who is convicted, however, may still be indicted, given a trial and punishment under civil or criminal law.

We the people give the Senate limitations on the sanctions that can be imposed on the person found guilty of a crime against the people.

The benefit to us is that elected officials are protected from severe punishments until their case is tried in the established courts.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

US Constitution

Wikipedia.org

President and President Pro Tempore of the Senate

President of the Senate

“The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.” US Constitution, Article 1, Section 3, Clause 4

The Constitution only gives one specific obligation to the Vice President. The Vice President is the President of the Senate. At present, the Vice President usually presides over the Senate only when a tie vote is anticipated. Since the Vice President is a non-member of the Senate, the only vote he may cast is a tie-breaking vote. During normal Senate business, the President pro tempore, who is a Senator selected to the position by the members of the Senate, presides when the Vice President is absent. The role of the President of the Senate is different from the Speaker of the House, who is a member of the House of Representatives and may participate in debate and voting. The Speaker usually doesn’t vote unless it is to cause a tie or break a tie, but can vote on any issue.

The current President of the Senate is Vice President Joseph Biden.

Joseph Biden, Vice President of the United States

We the people give the Vice President a post as President of the Senate and give him opportunity to keep informed about the issues and concerns of the nation.

The benefit to us is that we get a person as President of the Senate who has been elected by the people.

President Pro Tempore of the Senate

“The Senate shall choose their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of the President of the United States.” US Constitution, Article 1, Section 3, Clause 5

I have put the discussion of the role of the President pro tempore in the same post as the President of the Senate, since the two roles are closely related.

The President pro tempore presides over the Senate in the absence of the Vice President. “Pro tempore” means “for the time being”. As of law passed in 1947, the President pro tempore is next in line for Presidential succession following the Speaker of the House.

The President pro tempore is an elected member of the Senate and as such may speak and vote as any Senator. Initially, the President pro tempore was chosen for his personal characteristics, popularity, and reliability. Since the 1950’s, it has been traditional that the senior member of the majority party in the Senate is elected as the President pro tempore. The modern-day President pro tempore will ask new members of the majority party to preside over the Senate so that they can learn more about the rules and procedures of the Senate.

Additional law allows for the President pro tempore to make appointments to national commissions, usually with advice of the majority leader. The President pro tempore may also administer oaths required by the Constitution, sign legislation, and other obligations of the presiding officer. The President pro tempore may not vote to break a tie in the Senate.

The current President pro tempore of the 113th Congress is Patrick Leahy (D, VT).

Patrick Leahy, President Pro Tempore of US Senate (D, VT)

To see a complete list of those who have served as President pro tempore of the US Senate, please see: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/President_Pro_Tempore.htm

We the people give the Senate the power to select the person to serve as President of the Senate in the absence of the Vice President and to be third in line for secession to the Presidency.

We the people get continuity in leadership and a leader who is knowledgeable of the rules and procedures of the Senate, who has been elected by the people.

“We should also answer the central question of public service. Why are we here? What do we believe in? Well for one thing, we’re here to see that government continues to serve the people and not the other way around. Yes, government should do all that is necessary, but only that which is necessary.” Ronald Reagan, Address accepting the Republican presidential nomination, Dallas, TX, August 23, 1984.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

US Constitution

http://www.senate.gov