Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: drewh

“The Speaker doesnt have to be a current member necessarily.... (according to the constitution)”


That interpretation assumes that when the Framers placed the words “the House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker” in Article I of the U.S. Constitution they were not basing the speakership on the Speaker of the House of Commons of the British Parliament, which most definitely *did* need to be filled by a Member of the House of Commons. The reason that they didn’t write “the House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker *from among their members*” was because it was deemed to be self-evident, since the Speaker is the leader of the House and the leader must come from within the group—had the Framers intended to allow the House to elect a Speaker that was not a member of the body, such a clear departure from parliamentary precedent would have been specifically noted, and they likely would have selected a title other than Speaker. The one instance in the U.S. Constitution where the presiding officer would not be a member of the body he presided was when the Vice President is made, ex officio, the President of the Senate, but he was specifically designated as such in Article I, and the fact that the VP is not a member of the Senate was probably the reason why they didn’t baptize the presiding officer of the Senate as “the Speaker of the Senate.”

No one believes that the Chief Justice of the United States can be someone other than a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and, until a few years ago (when a couple of Republicans upset at Newt Gingrich voted for retired Republicans for Speaker) no one other than a sitting Representative had even received a vote for Speaker. I think the theory of the non-member of the House serving as Speaker is an interesting exercise in constitutional analysis, as is the theory that the Governor of New York could be in the line of succession to the presidency (a governor is, after all, an “officer”), but having a non-member serve as Speaker ultimately would be a distortion of the Framers’ original intent.


40 posted on 01/02/2013 5:28:06 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: AuH2ORepublican

Mark Levin has been promoting the idea...his suggestion is Scott Walker for Speaker.


66 posted on 01/02/2013 5:39:30 PM PST by Tex-Con-Man (<-------currently working through post-election anger issues.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: AuH2ORepublican
No one believes that the Chief Justice of the United States can be someone other than a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court

Let's ask John Roberts about that!

76 posted on 01/02/2013 5:45:40 PM PST by HomeAtLast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: AuH2ORepublican; drewh

2. How is the Speaker of the House elected?
Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states, “The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers.”

Although the Constitution does not require the Speaker to be a Member of the House, all Speakers have been Members.

When a Congress convenes for the first time, each major party conference or caucus nominates a candidate for Speaker. Members customarily elect the Speaker by roll call vote. A Member usually votes for the candidate from his or her own party conference or caucus but can vote for anyone, whether that person has been nominated or not.

To be elected, a candidate must receive an absolute majority of the votes cast—which may be less than a majority of the full House because of vacancies, absentee Members, or Members who vote “present.” If no candidate receives the majority of votes, the roll call is repeated until a majority is reached and the Speaker is elected.

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/memberfaq.aspx


94 posted on 01/02/2013 5:56:36 PM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: AuH2ORepublican

I understand your reasoning, but many Constitutional scholars such as Mark Levin, as well as many before him, disagree with you. I was a rather young tyke when I first heard this discussed in the 70s, so it is certainly not a new concept.


279 posted on 01/03/2013 8:08:19 AM PST by AFPhys ((Praying for our troops, our citizens, that the Bible and Freedom become basis of the US law again))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson