Yes, this is the legitimate concern. In the eyes of liberals Republicans and Conservatives are ignorant or mentally inferior — which when you think about what liberals say and do, … is far more insulting than one first thinks, … because you have to be pretty low to say and do what they do.
They should give a mental competency test and a full medical examination by 5 independent doctors before someone declares themselves to be a candidate for President or Vice President. All findings and medical histories should be published.
Had they given a mental competence test to Biden in 1988 when he first ran, he would have failed. He had early onset arrogance and suffered from low IQ.
Professor Heyward, elucidate me as a lowly Canadian.
To my understanding, the 25th Amendment is worse in every respect from impeachment if I have the process right:
> VP + majority of cabinet send letter to Congress.
> Congress moves to appoint the Kamala to POTUS. Even here, Biden is raising a fit at the bravery & executive decision of Kamala and the likes of Berrera, Buttigieg, and Yellen. But assume Congress follows through.
> Biden sends a letter saying “coup” or “false alarm”.
> Harris & Cabinet muster the bravery a second time.
> Congress has 21 days to vote 2/3rds in both the *house & senate*
An impeachment proceeding would originate in a GOP house and only require a simple majority.
Now, since VP + Cabinet actually revolted that puts pressure on D’s, but that is totally unlikely given how they acted and that reports were:
a) cabinet meetings were rambling & incoherent since 2021,
b) Jake Sullivan was delegated duties since 2021 as Biden was having “good days and bad days” since then as well and
c) Kamala couldn’t distance herself from senile and unpopular Joe even when she’d won nomination and had her shot at POTUS.
I don’t think Kamala is as ambitious as people think. Sure, she wants the job, like I want to run an Ironman, in that neither of us has what it takes nor has any intention of doing whatever we can to find out for certain. She couldn’t decide how to answer questions on trans surgeries for illegal immigrant prisoners, much less throw Uncle Joe under the parabus during a campaign when she was in the heat of it.
Am I missing the process? I’ve not read the book but from what has been leaked since Biden left office of how bad things were since the first days of 2021, nobody was surprised.
I keep thinking that this was a party that had imposed the strictest party discipline I’ve ever seen, and I’m a Canadian who witnessed Trudeau parliament. Every word uttered since November 2016, whether it was turning boys into girls or trying to return kids to school 6 months after the entire country was vaccinated for COVID, was weighed for compliance, and words against the party line were helping fascist Trump, or spreading misinformation, and so on.
I'm glad you put forward the complete process. With respect to Mr Hayward, this is far from a simple fix. It is important to note that the vote if the President objects must be the VP and Cabinet.
The 25th, despite claims to being open-ended, was designed to cover a single scenario that was critical in the context of the time it was enacted. During the Cold War, the time limit on establishing national command authority for nuclear release in the event the President was incapacitated but alive or missing and presumed dead could be hours at best. It was critical to allow the VP to assume the office without positive proof of the President's death, as well as establishing a procedure short of resignation to release it (In essence it's mandatory that the VP release it.) The remaining portions of Section 4 make it clear that the possibility of a Cabinet/Congressional coup was contemplated and the Rube Goldberg scheme of letters, counter-letters, and super-majority votes is designed to keep that from happening to any President who is at least upright and breathing however limited his faculties are.
The way I’d heard it, and may have been from Mr. Heyward or a podcast he was starring in, was that Kennedy wasn’t immediately declared dead and there was some hesitation about swearing in LBJ because everyone was in shock and apprehensive.
You make interesting points, Mr. Fouranno. Here are my responses, in part. Yes, it's true that Congressional Democrats have acted with sometimes-astounding party discipline. However, the same consideration applied when the Democrats pushed Joe Biden out of the Presidential nomination. At that time, it was reported that Kamala Harris was not the first choice of leading Democrats to replace Biden on the November election ticket. It's this that might have opened a window for the 25th Amendment. In my hypothetical, Kamala Harris proposes that she will take her name off the ballot IN RETURN FOR the support of core Democrats for invoking the 25th Amendment. Two-thirds of Congress is a heavy lift for ONE party, but I think it's much more doable if BOTH parties support it. A couple of further refinements: Kamala has a Bill drafted BEFORE assuming the powers of the Presidency to stand up a Presidential Special Medical Board, as Prof. Hayward suggested. Under the circumstances, the members should serve with one-year terms, making the Board easy to take down during the next administration. Second, Kamala would have to approach her action in a true Machiavellian spirit, so that likely opponents are eliminated on Day 1 - fire the director of the Secret Service on the spot, have the U.S. Attorney for Delaware revoke Hunter's bail, pack Joe and Jill Biden off to Camp David, and so forth.
There was and is absolutely no reason for the GOP, or any opposition party, to assist in ejecting a President merely because he's certain to lose the next election. That was the only reason Biden was kicked off the ticket but allowed to remain President. If the disability is so great as to elicit bipartisan support for removal the 25th as it exists will work just fine.
You think? Well, here are three points. First, the Democrats proved perfectly capable of pulling Biden off the ticket with no GOP support whatsoever. Second, I think "he's too old to run for President, but not too old to serve as President" is a really heavy lift, even for those who think like MSNBC panelists. Third, if the past 4 years show nothing, they show HOW BAD presidential incapacity can get with nobody lifting an actual finger to deal with the problem.
I was going to make this exact point but I see I am not the first! :-)
I noticed that phrase when the 25th Amendment first became part of the Constitution: I noted to several people that it was an open invitation to a Congressional coup against a sitting president. As written, the VP would still have to initiate the process...but blind ambition will find a way, no?
No, not a formula or a panel of "independent experts." Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Instead, a vote of a responsible and courageous Congress. The "courageous" part is a pipe dream, but, unlike the formula or the experts, Congress has some degree of political accountability.
The phrase "responsible and courageous Congress" is a rhetorical expression, often used in political speech or commentary, to praise or call for a legislative body (Congress) that demonstrates two key virtues:
> Responsible…
> Courageous…
…
It’s a phrase that combines moral integrity with political bravery, often used aspirationally or as a critique when Congress is perceived to lack those traits.
I appreciate Steve's efforts to "form a more perfect union", but no corrupt administration will be held accountable without a press/news media willing to do there job.
Biden's media cheerleaders would have figured out a way to discredit a panel of five doctors, and the far left would dox them, then SWAT them, assault them at restaurants, and finally set up 7x24 hr demonstrations with bull horns outside their homes .
I agree in principle but know that this would be weaponized by the Democratic party.
Yes, this is the legitimate concern. In the eyes of liberals Republicans and Conservatives are ignorant or mentally inferior — which when you think about what liberals say and do, … is far more insulting than one first thinks, … because you have to be pretty low to say and do what they do.
This is so true and it’s sad that we have people with no honor or integrity in public office that they would happily weaponize this power.
They should give a mental competency test and a full medical examination by 5 independent doctors before someone declares themselves to be a candidate for President or Vice President. All findings and medical histories should be published.
Had they given a mental competence test to Biden in 1988 when he first ran, he would have failed. He had early onset arrogance and suffered from low IQ.
Professor Heyward, elucidate me as a lowly Canadian.
To my understanding, the 25th Amendment is worse in every respect from impeachment if I have the process right:
> VP + majority of cabinet send letter to Congress.
> Congress moves to appoint the Kamala to POTUS. Even here, Biden is raising a fit at the bravery & executive decision of Kamala and the likes of Berrera, Buttigieg, and Yellen. But assume Congress follows through.
> Biden sends a letter saying “coup” or “false alarm”.
> Harris & Cabinet muster the bravery a second time.
> Congress has 21 days to vote 2/3rds in both the *house & senate*
An impeachment proceeding would originate in a GOP house and only require a simple majority.
Now, since VP + Cabinet actually revolted that puts pressure on D’s, but that is totally unlikely given how they acted and that reports were:
a) cabinet meetings were rambling & incoherent since 2021,
b) Jake Sullivan was delegated duties since 2021 as Biden was having “good days and bad days” since then as well and
c) Kamala couldn’t distance herself from senile and unpopular Joe even when she’d won nomination and had her shot at POTUS.
I don’t think Kamala is as ambitious as people think. Sure, she wants the job, like I want to run an Ironman, in that neither of us has what it takes nor has any intention of doing whatever we can to find out for certain. She couldn’t decide how to answer questions on trans surgeries for illegal immigrant prisoners, much less throw Uncle Joe under the parabus during a campaign when she was in the heat of it.
Am I missing the process? I’ve not read the book but from what has been leaked since Biden left office of how bad things were since the first days of 2021, nobody was surprised.
I keep thinking that this was a party that had imposed the strictest party discipline I’ve ever seen, and I’m a Canadian who witnessed Trudeau parliament. Every word uttered since November 2016, whether it was turning boys into girls or trying to return kids to school 6 months after the entire country was vaccinated for COVID, was weighed for compliance, and words against the party line were helping fascist Trump, or spreading misinformation, and so on.
I'm glad you put forward the complete process. With respect to Mr Hayward, this is far from a simple fix. It is important to note that the vote if the President objects must be the VP and Cabinet.
The 25th, despite claims to being open-ended, was designed to cover a single scenario that was critical in the context of the time it was enacted. During the Cold War, the time limit on establishing national command authority for nuclear release in the event the President was incapacitated but alive or missing and presumed dead could be hours at best. It was critical to allow the VP to assume the office without positive proof of the President's death, as well as establishing a procedure short of resignation to release it (In essence it's mandatory that the VP release it.) The remaining portions of Section 4 make it clear that the possibility of a Cabinet/Congressional coup was contemplated and the Rube Goldberg scheme of letters, counter-letters, and super-majority votes is designed to keep that from happening to any President who is at least upright and breathing however limited his faculties are.
The way I’d heard it, and may have been from Mr. Heyward or a podcast he was starring in, was that Kennedy wasn’t immediately declared dead and there was some hesitation about swearing in LBJ because everyone was in shock and apprehensive.
The Chinese fire drill after the attempt on President Reagan's life is also instructive, and that was after the 25th Amendment was in place.
You make interesting points, Mr. Fouranno. Here are my responses, in part. Yes, it's true that Congressional Democrats have acted with sometimes-astounding party discipline. However, the same consideration applied when the Democrats pushed Joe Biden out of the Presidential nomination. At that time, it was reported that Kamala Harris was not the first choice of leading Democrats to replace Biden on the November election ticket. It's this that might have opened a window for the 25th Amendment. In my hypothetical, Kamala Harris proposes that she will take her name off the ballot IN RETURN FOR the support of core Democrats for invoking the 25th Amendment. Two-thirds of Congress is a heavy lift for ONE party, but I think it's much more doable if BOTH parties support it. A couple of further refinements: Kamala has a Bill drafted BEFORE assuming the powers of the Presidency to stand up a Presidential Special Medical Board, as Prof. Hayward suggested. Under the circumstances, the members should serve with one-year terms, making the Board easy to take down during the next administration. Second, Kamala would have to approach her action in a true Machiavellian spirit, so that likely opponents are eliminated on Day 1 - fire the director of the Secret Service on the spot, have the U.S. Attorney for Delaware revoke Hunter's bail, pack Joe and Jill Biden off to Camp David, and so forth.
There was and is absolutely no reason for the GOP, or any opposition party, to assist in ejecting a President merely because he's certain to lose the next election. That was the only reason Biden was kicked off the ticket but allowed to remain President. If the disability is so great as to elicit bipartisan support for removal the 25th as it exists will work just fine.
You think? Well, here are three points. First, the Democrats proved perfectly capable of pulling Biden off the ticket with no GOP support whatsoever. Second, I think "he's too old to run for President, but not too old to serve as President" is a really heavy lift, even for those who think like MSNBC panelists. Third, if the past 4 years show nothing, they show HOW BAD presidential incapacity can get with nobody lifting an actual finger to deal with the problem.
Something like the J6 committee?
I was going to make this exact point but I see I am not the first! :-)
I noticed that phrase when the 25th Amendment first became part of the Constitution: I noted to several people that it was an open invitation to a Congressional coup against a sitting president. As written, the VP would still have to initiate the process...but blind ambition will find a way, no?
"I, Chairman Fauci, now call this panel of five experts to order...."
Pass.
No, not a formula or a panel of "independent experts." Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Instead, a vote of a responsible and courageous Congress. The "courageous" part is a pipe dream, but, unlike the formula or the experts, Congress has some degree of political accountability.
“…a responsible and courageous Congress.”
An extensive web search did not find any translations for this phrase. What does it mean?
😆!
Good question. I asked chatgpt:
********
The phrase "responsible and courageous Congress" is a rhetorical expression, often used in political speech or commentary, to praise or call for a legislative body (Congress) that demonstrates two key virtues:
> Responsible…
> Courageous…
…
It’s a phrase that combines moral integrity with political bravery, often used aspirationally or as a critique when Congress is perceived to lack those traits.
********
This exchange inspired me.
https://open.substack.com/pub/vogonpoetry/p/a-responsible-and-courageous-congress?r=2pxoc&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
ChatGPT has a sense of humor!
Great idea. Won't happen.
Our heroic Congress will see to this shortly after passing a balanced budget.
Joe, they could control. Harris is a loose cannon.
I appreciate Steve's efforts to "form a more perfect union", but no corrupt administration will be held accountable without a press/news media willing to do there job.
Biden's media cheerleaders would have figured out a way to discredit a panel of five doctors, and the far left would dox them, then SWAT them, assault them at restaurants, and finally set up 7x24 hr demonstrations with bull horns outside their homes .
No doctor is going to volunteer for that duty.
I thought we all agreed we were only going "to look forward."
Why didn't Republicans just adopt that response after Biden was innaugurated whenever Jan 6 was brought up?
I like the idea of high profile in-depth investigation and hearings under the guise of contemplating such legislation…
and then consigning it to go nowhere as such a panel would inevitably be captured by the Left and used for Soviet-style political purges.