Presidential line of successon, perfect as it is?..........

[Lincoln Republican]

..........Or would you like to see it changed in any way?

Please discuss.

Current line of succession

1 Vice President  
2 Speaker of the House  
3 President pro tempore of the Senate  
4 Secretary of State  
5 Secretary of the Treasury  
6 Secretary of Defense  
7 Attorney General  
8 Secretary of the Interior  
9 Secretary of Agriculture  
10 Secretary of Commerce  
11 Secretary of Labor  
12 Secretary of Health and Human Services  
13 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development  
14 Secretary of Transportation  
15 Secretary of Energy  
16 Secretary of Education  
17 Secretary of Veterans Affairs  
18 Secretary of Homeland Security  

[Joe Republic]

The third in line is invariably an octogenarian or older, and thus shouldn't be in position to assume one of the most stressful and demanding jobs in the world.

Also, and I realize it's a new position, but the Sec of Homeland Security should probably be ahead of other departments like Agriculture or HUD, for example.  I mean, it's their job to make sure the country is stable and under control, which would probably be a priority if something had happened to the half dozen or so people directly ahead of him or her.

[J. J.]

I'd probably lower the PPT, or perhaps create and substitute a new position, i.e "Executive Secretary," who would be the designated survivor. 

Homeland Security would above Agriculture.

[Јas]

I'd most likely get rid of the Speaker and PPT from the line. Move Defence and Homeland Security toward the front of the list (for reasoning similar to that alluded to by Joe). Keep State, Treasury and the AG highly placed. After that I'm fairly ambivalent to the ordering.

Actually, I'm not sold that there should be a line of succession, or maybe that beyond the VP any successor from such a list should be for a very temporary period pending some form of special election (by Congress maybe?) to fill the position.

[Thomas D]

Toss out Speaker and PPT. In 2008 Americans said they wanted Democrats to run the White House for 4 years. So in 2011 it wouldn't be right for Speaker Boehner to become President just as it would have been wrong for Speaker Pelosi to become President after Americans put Republicans in charge in 2004.

And put Homeland Security between Defense and Attorney General.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There had been thought of putting Homeland Security in the position formerly held by the Secretary of the Navy, between the Attorney General and the Secretary of Interior.  The difference in opinion kept Homeland Security from being added to the line until 2006.

I'd remove both Speaker and PPT from the line of succession and at the end add the Army, Navy, and Air Force Secretaries in that order followed by the various Deputy Secretaries, in the same order as the primaries.

I'd also make the persons who are after the Vice President be only an Acting President until either a President is elected at the next election or the Electoral College selected at the last election can convene again to elect a new President and Vice President.

If it weren't for the fact that it would take a Constitutional Amendment instead of a Law to do so, I'd change the process of selecting a replacement Vice President to use the Electoral College instead of the mechanism in the 25th Amendment.  However, changes in succession law aren't significant enough to warrant an additional amendment.

[Vepres]

Vice President 
Speaker of the House 
President pro tempore Majority Leader of the Senate 
Secretary of State   
Secretary of Defense 
Secretary of the Treasury 
Attorney General 
White House Chief of Staff
Secretary of Homeland Security 
Secretary of Health and Human Services 
Secretary of Commerce 
Secretary of Labor 
Secretary of the Interior 
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development   
Secretary of Energy 
Secretary of Education 
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Agriculture 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs 


Basically, the VP, then the most powerful people in the House and Senate, respectively, then the "Big 4". I put the chief of staff after that because they would have the knowledge to be a temporary President.

[minionofmidas]

It really doesn't matter.

What I would like to see changed (if I were an American) is the part where the successor serves out the entire term, rather than an interim of a couple of months.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

To be honest, I like Truman solution to include Speaker and PPT into the line before cabinet officials.

However now I'd replace PPT with Majority Leader or maybe institute a custom, that is already practicized in NY Senate, that Majority Leader is also serving as PPT.

[Хahar 🤔]

Legislative officials should not be included in the line of succession.

[Psychic Octopus]

Legislative officials should not be included in the line of succession.

I agree. Remove the PPT and the Speaker from the order.

Move Homeland Security right below Attorney General as well.

[Lincoln Republican]

What does anyone think of this idea?

In order to maintain the will of the electorate as far as the party of the President goes

If it is a Republican administration, the Senate Republican leader falls in line behind the Vice President, then the Republican House Leader falls next in line.

If it is a Democratic administration, the Senate Democratic leader falls in line behind the Vice President, then the Democratic House Leader falls next in line.

If the President is neither Republican nor Democratic, the Senate Majority Leader falls in line behind the Vice President, then the House Majority Leader falls next in line.

This would maintain party continuity in the administration, keeping the same party in the Presidency that the voters had elected to office for that particular term, for Republican and Democratic administrations at least.

Thoughts on this?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

What does anyone think of this idea?

In order to maintain the will of the electorate as far as the party of the President goes

If it is a Republican administration, the Senate Republican leader falls in line behind the Vice President, then the Republican House Leader falls next in line.

If it is a Democratic administration, the Senate Democratic leader falls in line behind the Vice President, then the Democratic House Leader falls next in line.

If the President is neither Republican nor Democratic, the Senate Majority Leader falls in line behind the Vice President, then the House Majority Leader falls next in line.

This would maintain party continuity in the administration, keeping the same party in the Presidency that the voters had elected to office for that particular term, for Republican and Democratic administrations at least.

Thoughts on this?

Not a fan........Clinton and George W Bush won a second term, but I think the public spoke clearly when Gingrich & Pelosi became Speaker that we don't want the President's party in charge......your scenario excludes that political reality just with the last 2 Presidents.

[Lincoln Republican]

Grumpy, you raise a somewhat valid argument, however, a new President could come to power with the other party already in control of Congress.  But to your point, when the voters elect a President, they do so for a four year term.  If that Presidents' party loses control of Congress part way through the Presidential term, that individual is still President, regardless of whether his party loses control of Congress two years into the term or not.  So another party taking control of Congress during a Presidential term does not equate to a party change in the Oval Office.

If a President dies or is otherwise removed part way through the term, it would be less disruptive for the new President to be of the same party, as they would likely not need to make many administration changes.  A President of another party may wish to make wholesale changes.

Completion of the four year term with a member of the same party would provide a smoother transition.  After the completion of the Presidential term, the voters could then decide whether to elect a President of the same party or another party.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Winfield, do you really think the country wanted a pub to succeed in 2007, or a dem to succeed in 1995?

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

The PPT has no business being part of it.

[Lincoln Republican]

Winfield, do you really think the country wanted a pub to succeed in 2007, or a dem to succeed in 1995?

Perhaps not,  but that does not change the fact that the President, in any case, was elected to a four year term.  And Clinton was reelected in 1996, event  though the Republicans won control of Congress in 1994.

[Lincoln Republican]

Legislative officials should not be included in the line of succession.

I agree. Remove the PPT and the Speaker from the order.

Move Homeland Security right below Attorney General as well.

But the idea behind having elected officials, Speaker and PPT, in line over appointed offlicials is exactly that, that they are elected, not appointed, like the cabinet is.

[cannonia]

The third in line is invariably an octogenarian or older, and thus shouldn't be in position to assume one of the most stressful and demanding jobs in the world.

Also, and I realize it's a new position, but the Sec of Homeland Security should probably be ahead of other departments like Agriculture or HUD, for example.  I mean, it's their job to make sure the country is stable and under control, which would probably be a priority if something had happened to the half dozen or so people directly ahead of him or her.

The Cabinet is unelected, and I disagree with your characterization of Homeland Security.

[tpfkaw]

1 Vice President  
2 Speaker of the House  
3 President pro tempore of the Senate Majority Leader
4 Secretary of State
5 Secretary of Defense
6 Governor of Virginia
7 Governor of Maryland
8 . . . Governors of other states and territories from most to least populous.

[feeblepizza]

1. Vice-President
2. Secretary of State
3. Secretary of Defense
4. Secretary of Homeland Security
5. Attorney General
6. Secretary of the Treasury
......................................................
Followed by the rest of the Cabinet.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I have to agree with Winfield on this one. Whatever the public leanings are during the term, the term is for four years and people must know they're making this one decision, regarding the Presidency, for four years.

Thus, Albert was right setting his precedent, but announcing he'd be only a caretaker is succeeded Nixon out of this particular reason.

[Joe Republic]

The third in line is invariably an octogenarian or older, and thus shouldn't be in position to assume one of the most stressful and demanding jobs in the world.

Also, and I realize it's a new position, but the Sec of Homeland Security should probably be ahead of other departments like Agriculture or HUD, for example.  I mean, it's their job to make sure the country is stable and under control, which would probably be a priority if something had happened to the half dozen or so people directly ahead of him or her.

The Cabinet is unelected, and I disagree with your characterization of Homeland Security.

The Speaker and PPT are only elected to Congress by their respective individual constituencies, and to their positions by the other members of their respective chambers of Congress.  That's not so much better than a Cabinet officer who was nominated by a federally elected President, and then 'elected' to their office by a body of elected officials.

And what's wrong with my characterization of the Sec of HS?  What makes the Sec. of Agriculture, HUD or Labor more qualified to step into the presidency than the Sec. of HS?

[Guderian]

If somehow President, VP, Secretaries of State, Treasury and Defense and AG are all wiped out together with congressional leaders, Secretary of Homeland Security should commit a suicide, not become a President.

[J. J.]

Putting the Speaker of the House in has one advantage; so long as there is at least one Congressman left, a Speaker can be chosen.

Because of the way the PPT is structured, the occupant is too old.  Either it should be the majority leader or the some high sounding title for a designated survivor, i.e. "Deputy President."

I might consider an "inner cabinet" before the Speaker, i.e., State, Defense, AG, Treasury, Homeland Security.

I would extend it through the cabinet and then to the eligible governors, based on population.

If all hell breaks loose, you need someone to pick up the pieces.