Skip to main content

View Diary: Lieberman, Chafee To Hand Political Gifts To Their Opponents (321 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Boo! (none)
    Stop strictly constructing the text of the constitution.  That's what the other side WANTS you to do.
    •  Ha ha (none)
      As you know, that clause doesn't exhaust the possible range of places where such an exception to the VP's tie-breaking power may be found, but I will not pursue it.

      Sixteen scandals in my heart will glow: click "A is for Abramoff"

      by Major Danby on Mon Jan 30, 2006 at 11:35:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Manners, Manners (none)
        "but I will not pursue it" is a singularly unmannered and ungracious way to lose an argument.  Please throw some evidence out there or admit you're wrong.  It seems to me that the clause from Article I Section 3 clearly implies the Vice President of the United States will break all Senate ties.  If it doesnt, please provide evidence to back up your assertion.  Thanks.
        •  Evidence? (none)
          Where in the Constitution does it explicitly prevent the Vice President from casting the tie-breaking vote on nominations?

          Please interpret the Constitution broad and generously -- like a liberal -- instead of cramped and niggardly -- like a conservative.  You'll end up having the law serve the interests of justice (as well as intellectualism) instead of solely intellectualism.

          Today, the Court purports to be the dispassionate oracle of the law, unmoved by "natural sympathy." - Justice Blackmun, dissenting, DeShaney v. Winnebago County

          by jim bow on Mon Jan 30, 2006 at 12:16:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Such a prohibition (none)
            could be established by statute or even by Senate rules, not solely by the Constitution.  But I was not going to spending time looking into them -- I have been calling and writing Senators in my spare time today -- and am persuaded by the Manion example below.

            I thought that I may have seen many years ago that this was on a list of exceptions to the normal rules of legislative business, one famous one being the Congressional ratification of constitutional amendments is excluded from the presentment clause.  I still think that there is some such exception to the VP's tie-breaking power, but since I can't think of what it is I will shut up about it.  I'm sorry if that seems ungracious, but we have bigger fish to fry right now.

            Sixteen scandals in my heart will glow: click "A is for Abramoff"

            by Major Danby on Mon Jan 30, 2006 at 01:02:27 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Fyi (none)
              And this is a digression.

              Dan Manion was then-Indiana Sen. Dan Quayle's law school friend.  A former-Indiana state legislator, Manion sponsored a bill requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments in their classrooms immediately after the Supreme Court struck down a similar Kentucky statute, 8-1, in 1980.  Manion, who was known for writing opinions with words misspelled and a member of the John Birch Society, received a "not qualified" rating from the American Bar Association.  Then-Sen. Dan Quayle, defending his friend on Ted Koppel's "Nightline," said at the time, "I'm not so sure that we want all those that graduated number one or number two in their class to be on... our federal judiciary."

              Sens. Biden (D-Del.) and Simon (D-Ill.) led the fight against the Manion nomination.

              Today, the Court purports to be the dispassionate oracle of the law, unmoved by "natural sympathy." - Justice Blackmun, dissenting, DeShaney v. Winnebago County

              by jim bow on Mon Jan 30, 2006 at 01:23:23 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  More evidence (none)
        On July 23, 1986, Vice President George H.W. Bush issued the tie-breaking vote on the motion to reconsider the vote on the nomination of Daniel Manion to be a judge on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.  It seems, at least during the 1980s, Vice Presidents werent limited to voting on legislation only.  In fact, if they were this would violate Art I Sec 3 of the Constitution.  Im not sure where you got that idea, but it is just flat wrong.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site