tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1300274096976708238.post1267262076866063383..comments2024-03-15T00:28:21.349-07:00Comments on THE WORLD ACCORDING TO KIMBA: WHO IS THIS GUY ON DEFENSE?Kimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15313026985830190914noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1300274096976708238.post-22889998978677498012008-11-30T20:25:00.000-08:002008-11-30T20:25:00.000-08:00More...In 1973, President Richard Nixon was able t...More...<BR/><BR/><I>In 1973, President Richard Nixon was able to appoint Sen. William B. Saxbe as his Attorney General, despite the fact the Saxbe was part of a Senate that nearly doubled Cabinet pay 1969, by convincing Congress to reduce Saxbe's pay as Attorney General to its pre-1969 levels.<BR/><BR/>The sidestep, since known as the "Saxbe fix," was also used by President Taft in 1909, President Carter and President George H. W. Bush, who actually implemented the fix to enable Sen. Lloyd Bentsen to serve as treasury secretary for President Clinton's incoming administration.<BR/><BR/>The so-called "fix," however, has been criticized as perhaps honoring the spirit of the law, but nonetheless violating a clearly written statute of the Constitution.<BR/><BR/>In the 1973 case, the Washington Post reports, 10 senators, all Democrats, voted against Saxbe's appointment on constitutional grounds. Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., the only one of them who remains in the Senate, said at the time that the Constitution was explicit and "we should not delude the American people into thinking a way can be found around the constitutional obstacle."<BR/><BR/>"The content of the rule here is broader than its purpose," Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen, a constitutional law expert at St. Thomas School of Law in Minneapolis, told MSNBC. "And the rule is the rule; the purpose is not the rule."<BR/><BR/>"A 'fix' can rescind the salary," Paulsen added, "but it cannot repeal historical events. The emoluments of the office had been increased. The rule specified in the text still controls." ...</I><BR/><BR/>Interesting history for a young guy... a problem you probably don't have Kimba...Papa Giorgiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14046222162630611579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1300274096976708238.post-91231924500844205772008-11-30T20:20:00.000-08:002008-11-30T20:20:00.000-08:00Damn that Constitution! First Obama's birth and n...Damn that Constitution! First Obama's birth and now...<BR/><BR/><I>Barack Obama, it has been reported, intends to announce Sen. Hillary Clinton as his choice for secretary of state, an appointment America's Founding Fathers forbade in the U.S. Constitution.<BR/><BR/>The constitutional quandary arises from a clause that forbids members of the Senate from being appointed to civil office, such as the secretary of state, if the "emoluments," or salary and benefits, of the office were increased during the senator's term.<BR/><BR/>The second clause of Article 1, Section 6, of the Constitution reads, "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."<BR/><BR/>During Hillary Clinton's current term in the Senate, the salary for Cabinet officers was increased from $186,600 to $191,300. Since the salary is scheduled to again be raised in January 2009, not only Hillary Clinton, but all sitting Senate members could be considered constitutionally ineligible to serve in Obama's Cabinet.</I><BR/><BR/>... Drat!Papa Giorgiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14046222162630611579noreply@blogger.com