Is Obama Making a Mistake?

[Master Mason]

I refer to the United States Constitution:
Article I
Section 6. 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.

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 increased 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.
Now does this mean that Senator Hillary Clinton can not be appointed as Secretary of State? She is a sitting Senator and she voted for a compensation increase for Cabinet Members during her current term.

I see either the far left or far right or both raising this issue for their own ends. I would think that President-Elect Obama would have realized this issue, he having been an Instructor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School!

 

[S. C.]

Subscribing to this one. Looks to be interesting. Just hope I have enough popcorn

 

[JB111107]

i'm curious how this will play out as well...or if we'll have another Saxby incident.

I guess he could appoint Bill instead...we all know Hillary always ran the show anyway, so it wouldn't be any different

 

[dejr_8]

I refer to the United States Constitution:
Article I
Section 6. 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.

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 increased 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.
Now does this mean that Senator Hillary Clinton can not be appointed as Secretary of State? She is a sitting Senator and she voted for a compensation increase for Cabinet Members during her current term.

I see either the far left or far right or both raising this issue for their own ends. I would think that President-Elect Obama would have realized this issue, he having been an Instructor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School!

Rules? , Rules? We don't need no stinking rules!

 

[ConcKahuna]

Doesn't the senate term end at the beginning of January?

If so, since she won't be filling the position as SoS until January, she wouldn't be Senator any more at the point when she is officially placed as SoS.

I could be wrong on that though

 

[Galahad]

This cannot be the first time a sitting Senator or Representative was appointed to a cabinet post ostensibly covered by that clause. It should be a non-issue.

 

[mtdevine615]

Well Since he is President elect at this time he really hasn't appointed anyone. That can't happen until he becomes President. At which time they will resign thier current positions and take on thier new roles.

 

[Obi-Wan Pinobi]

The thing the OP is questioning isn't HRC being a Senator and SoS at the same time, but rather her voting for an increase in pay and benefits (i.e., the emoluments) for cabinet officials while a senator. Can she take a cabinet position for which she approved a pay increase, basically giving herself a pay raise?

The key phrase may be "during the time for which he was elected." If the vote happened during her first term, it may not be an issue. If it was after she was re-elected, it could be. If the phrase refers to each individual congress, it will be a non-issue. Right now we're in the 110th Congress, which will be replaced by the 111th Congress at the beginning of January. The 111th will be the one to confirm HRC, even if the pay increase was approved by the 110th.

Of course, HRC could argue that she is not a he and it doesn't apply to her, but I don't think that would fly very well.

 

[MAKmom]

The thing the OP is questioning isn't HRC being a Senator and SoS at the same time, but rather her voting for an increase in pay and benefits (i.e., the emoluments) for cabinet officials while a senator. Can she take a cabinet position for which she approved a pay increase, basically giving herself a pay raise?

The key phrase may be "during the time for which he was elected." If the vote happened during her first term, it may not be an issue. If it was after she was re-elected, it could be. If the phrase refers to each individual congress, it will be a non-issue. Right now we're in the 110th Congress, which will be replaced by the 111th Congress at the beginning of January. The 111th will be the one to confirm HRC, even if the pay increase was approved by the 110th.

Of course, HRC could argue that she is not a he and it doesn't apply to her, but I don't think that would fly very well.

That was a good catch!

 

[Tanuki]

I think this would only apply if she voted for the pay increase having remained in the Senate once she knew she was going to be the next Secretary of State.

Do you have the actual date that she voted the pay increase?

 

[bicker]

Interesting perspective on this:

The President acted illegally when he increased (by appropriating funds without going to Congress) the Secretary of State's salary by Executive Order. I wasn't aware and I think it should not be the case that the President have authority to appropriate monies through Executive Order. Therefore, since the order was illegal and has no standing in the law or statute, the Secretary of State's salary has not been increased and Senator Clinton is eligible to serve.

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_.../24/hillary-clinton-s-emoluments-problem.aspx

 

[Charade]

Her current term started in 2007. She has to resign.

Apparently, the people over at DailyKOS have a problem with this too.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/22/17102/488/347/664781

 

[CarlaKay]

The fix is that they lower the Secretary of State salary back to the level before the last raise. This has been done before for members of both parties.

 

[GeorgeG]

Recalling the thread about questions on the application to work for the Obama team, I'm guessing everything will be worked out by January 20th and all the T's will be crossed and all the I's will be dotted. At least I hope so. If Obama is going to have any chance at being good for this country he can't start out with controversy. I'm sure he knows that. We'll know for sure in a few months.

 

[bicker]

The fix is that they lower the Secretary of State salary back to the level before the last raise. This has been done before for members of both parties.

This is the critical aspect of this issue.

 

[JB111107]

I have a feeling controversy is going to surround Obama no matter what happens. He's already ticked off people on both sides of the aisle, so it will just go with the territory.

I'm really surprised Hillary would even accept the appointment. I can see why he would want her in that job, but from her perspective, if his administration ends up being a sinking ship, which many have predicted, I would think she would want to be as far away from his administration as possible if she wants to be able to run again in 2012....of course being SOS DOES put her in "line" to become president....

 

[bicker]

I don't believe anyone has, during any of our lifetimes, ever run against a sitting President for that President's party nomination, and won the year's general election. There is no reason to think that Hillary Clinton has any thoughts, whatsoever, of doing so.

 

[taximomfor4]

I don't believe anyone has, during any of our lifetimes, ever run against a sitting President for that President's party nomination, and won the year's general election. There is no reason to think that Hillary Clinton has any thoughts, whatsoever, of doing so.

so 2016?

 

[bicker]

By that time, she'd be almost as old as McCain was. Regardless, even if the most fervent dreams of those who hate Obama most come true then that wouldn't really affect Clinton's chances in 2012. (Indeed, given that Biden is current VP, the Obama-haters' most fervent dream would actually be to Clinton's benefit.)

 

[Charade]

I don't believe anyone has, during any of our lifetimes, ever run against a sitting President for that President's party nomination, and won the year's general election.

Especially a current cabinet member. She'd have to start running in 2010.

There is no reason to think that Hillary Clinton has any thoughts, whatsoever, of doing so.

She gave it a shot but she's done.