Constitutionality of Clinton as Secretary of State...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Steerpike, Dec 4, 2008.

  1. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,581
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,015
    Obama's already shown that he has little to no regard for the Constitution, so I doubt he's all that concerned about this. I also doubt this will stop Clinton from serving as Secretary of State.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    Nevertheless it is an interesting issue. In the past, people have gotten around it by lowering the salary. I wonder if they'll do that this time (though as pointed out this isn't really a fix).
     
  4. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,581
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,015
    My guess is that they won't even bother to do that, the issue will probably be mostly ignored.
     
  5. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    if the salary for sec of state is lowered then where is the actual "corruption" of Clinton's appointment? And, further, would it matter to an organization like Judicial Watch who claims in their own mission statement to be a conservative group.
     
  6. Silence
    Offline

    Silence wanna lick?

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,820
    Thanks Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    FL
    Ratings:
    +457
    what the hell does that even mean? this is easily remedied. They just roll back the pay grade to what it was before Clinton became a senator. Like they did with Nixon's attorney general

    This is such a minor nothing issue that I find it ridiculous and laughable that anyone would even make a big deal out of it.
     
  7. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    Well, where the interesting legal question comes in is that the Constitution on its face has an outright prohibition if the salary was increased during the Legislator's term. The question then, even in the event of a rollback of salary, is whether legislative action such as a rollback is sufficient to negate an outright Constitutional prohibition (i.e. the Constitution doesn't say such a person can't serve unless the salary is rolled back; it just says they can't serve).
     
  8. Steerpike
    Offline

    Steerpike VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,847
    Thanks Received:
    182
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +182
    Some people can see the subtle and interesting legal issue involved; others cannot.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,581
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,015
    What do you mean what does that mean? I think I was clear. The Constitution will be ignored and Clinton will serve as Secretary of State.
     
  10. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    but wouldn't that increase effectively hobble any potential candidate for an appointed position regardless of all other qualification? And, while I see how the concern for corruption might be in place if candidates stack salaries I still wonder where the actual corruption is if the income is rolled back.

    Looks like there is precedence for a roll back solution, eh?


    and, again, I'd have to wonder if a conservative organization would care about doing more than throwing caltrops in the path of the opposition administration anyway.
     

Share This Page