Sarah Palin: VP Is 'In Charge Of United States Senate'

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
Was that asked by a second grader or did I mishear it? Fantastic, I bet they blame it on that elite gotcha recess crowd
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.
 

Eeezee

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
9,922
0
76
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

Issuing a tie-breaking vote does not make you 'in charge of' the senate. The legislative branch is designed to be mostly independent of the executive branch. Claiming that the VP is in charge of the senate is akin to saying that the VP controls the senate.

Being the president of the senate and in charge of the senate are two very different things, until Cheney decided that they should be the same.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Didn't Senator Biden already whip her during the VP debate for this answer to the question of what responsibilities she'd carry in a McCain administration? Is she not supposed to stick to her role in the executive branch of government and leave the legislative branch to do its business?
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: Eeezee
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

Issuing a tie-breaking vote does not make you 'in charge of' the senate. The legislative branch is designed to be mostly independent of the executive branch. Claiming that the VP is in charge of the senate is akin to saying that the VP controls the senate.

Being the president of the senate and in charge of the senate are two very different things, until Cheney decided that they should be the same.

Right, I understand that, however to give her the benefit of the doubt, I believe she was trying to phrase her response so that a 2nd grader might understand.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,913
3,891
136
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

If by "in charge" you mean recognizing senators to speak, ruling on points of order, and only being allowed to vote in a tie you are correct. If you mean actually setting the entire agenda of the chamber (scheduling debates and votes), then you are wrong. That is the Senate Majority Leader.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,702
54,694
136
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

The senate majority leader sets the schedule for the senate, he is in charge of it.

Is anyone else starting to feel Palin stupidity fatigue? I mean it's something new every day that is just breathtakingly dumb. At this point I'm having trouble continuing to muster the will to keep laughing at her.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Modern VPs typically only cast tie-breaking votes I think -- the President pro tempore actually presides over the Senate. But IIRC the Constitution does grant that power to the VP.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

VP can in no rational way be described as being "in charge" of the Senate. They do not participate in committee selection, they do not participate in rules and procedures, or in negotiating legislation. In fact, any attempt by a VP to do any of those things would certainly result in condemnation and possibly some sort of constitutional hearing.

But since this was an answer directed to a 3rd grader maybe she was trying to keep it simple. *cough*
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
So after being done raw by Couric now she only interviews with grade schoolers and sycophants like Hannity? Lulz.

But really it is hard to tell if she tailored this to kids or simply doesn't know any better. WIth her, I cannot give benefit of the doubt, she has not earned that.
 

evident

Lifer
Apr 5, 2005
12,125
744
126
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

The senate majority leader sets the schedule for the senate, he is in charge of it.

Is anyone else starting to feel Palin stupidity fatigue? I mean it's something new every day that is just breathtakingly dumb. At this point I'm having trouble continuing to muster the will to keep laughing at her.

i don't know how people can still defend this idiot.
 

Caecus Veritas

Senior member
Mar 20, 2006
547
0
0
given her answer during the one and only debate, i think it's safe to believe that she actually thinks that and did not tailor the question for a kid.
 

bbdub333

Senior member
Aug 21, 2007
684
0
0
http://www.senate.gov/artandhi...ing/Vice_President.htm

Vice-Presidential Duties

The framers also devoted scant attention to the vice president's duties, providing only that he "shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3). In practice, the number of times vice presidents have exercised this right has varied greatly. John Adams holds the record at 29 votes, followed closely by John C. Calhoun with 28. Since the 1870s, however, no vice president has cast as many as 10 tie-breaking votes. While vice presidents have used their votes chiefly on legislative issues, they have also broken ties on the election of Senate officers, as well as on the appointment of committees in 1881 when the parties were evenly represented in the Senate.

The vice president's other constitutionally mandated duty was to receive from the states the tally of electoral ballots cast for president and vice president and to open the certificates "in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives," so that the total votes could be counted (Article II, section 1). Only a few happy vice presidents ? John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, and George Bush ? had the pleasure of announcing their own election as president. Many more were chagrined to announce the choice of some rival for the office.

Several framers ultimately refused to sign the Constitution, in part because they viewed the vice president's legislative role as a violation of the separation of powers doctrine. Elbridge Gerry, who would later serve as vice president, declared that the framers "might as well put the President himself as head of the legislature." Others thought the office unnecessary but agreed with Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman that "if the vice-President were not to be President of the Senate, he would be without employment, and some member [of the Senate, acting as presiding officer] must be deprived of his vote."

Under the original code of Senate rules, the presiding officer exercised great power over the conduct of the body's proceedings. Rule XVI provided that "every question of order shall be decided by the President [of the Senate], without debate; but if there be a doubt in his mind, he may call for a sense of the Senate." Thus, contrary to later practice, the presiding officer was the sole judge of proper procedure and his rulings could not be turned aside by the full Senate without his assent.

The first two vice presidents, Adams and Jefferson, did much to shape the nature of the office, setting precedents that were followed by others. During most of the nineteenth century, the degree of influence and the role played within the Senate depended chiefly on the personality and inclinations of the individual involved. Some had great parliamentary skill and presided well, while others found the task boring, were incapable of maintaining order, or chose to spend most of their time away from Washington, leaving the duty to a president pro tempore. Some made an effort to preside fairly, while others used their position to promote the political agenda of the administration.

During the twentieth century, the role of the vice president has evolved into more of an executive branch position. Now, the vice president is usually seen as an integral part of a president's administration and presides over the Senate only on ceremonial occasions or when a tie-breaking vote may be needed. Yet, even though the nature of the job has changed, it is still greatly affected by the personality and skills of the individual incumbent.

Given her audience, I don't see how some of you nuts can say her answer wasn't appropriate.

PS- Wasn't it Biden that didn't even know which article of the Constitution covered the Executive branch when the issue of VP duties was brought up in their last debate?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,702
54,694
136
Originally posted by: bbdub333
http://www.senate.gov/artandhi...ing/Vice_President.htm

Vice-Presidential Duties

The framers also devoted scant attention to the vice president's duties, providing only that he "shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3). In practice, the number of times vice presidents have exercised this right has varied greatly. John Adams holds the record at 29 votes, followed closely by John C. Calhoun with 28. Since the 1870s, however, no vice president has cast as many as 10 tie-breaking votes. While vice presidents have used their votes chiefly on legislative issues, they have also broken ties on the election of Senate officers, as well as on the appointment of committees in 1881 when the parties were evenly represented in the Senate.

The vice president's other constitutionally mandated duty was to receive from the states the tally of electoral ballots cast for president and vice president and to open the certificates "in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives," so that the total votes could be counted (Article II, section 1). Only a few happy vice presidents ? John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, and George Bush ? had the pleasure of announcing their own election as president. Many more were chagrined to announce the choice of some rival for the office.

Several framers ultimately refused to sign the Constitution, in part because they viewed the vice president's legislative role as a violation of the separation of powers doctrine. Elbridge Gerry, who would later serve as vice president, declared that the framers "might as well put the President himself as head of the legislature." Others thought the office unnecessary but agreed with Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman that "if the vice-President were not to be President of the Senate, he would be without employment, and some member [of the Senate, acting as presiding officer] must be deprived of his vote."

Under the original code of Senate rules, the presiding officer exercised great power over the conduct of the body's proceedings. Rule XVI provided that "every question of order shall be decided by the President [of the Senate], without debate; but if there be a doubt in his mind, he may call for a sense of the Senate." Thus, contrary to later practice, the presiding officer was the sole judge of proper procedure and his rulings could not be turned aside by the full Senate without his assent.

The first two vice presidents, Adams and Jefferson, did much to shape the nature of the office, setting precedents that were followed by others. During most of the nineteenth century, the degree of influence and the role played within the Senate depended chiefly on the personality and inclinations of the individual involved. Some had great parliamentary skill and presided well, while others found the task boring, were incapable of maintaining order, or chose to spend most of their time away from Washington, leaving the duty to a president pro tempore. Some made an effort to preside fairly, while others used their position to promote the political agenda of the administration.

During the twentieth century, the role of the vice president has evolved into more of an executive branch position. Now, the vice president is usually seen as an integral part of a president's administration and presides over the Senate only on ceremonial occasions or when a tie-breaking vote may be needed. Yet, even though the nature of the job has changed, it is still greatly affected by the personality and skills of the individual incumbent.

Given her audience, I don't see how some of you nuts can say her answer wasn't appropriate.

I guess the Queen is in charge of England then too!
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: evident
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
VP's *are* in charge of the senate. In fact, they're referred to as the "President of the Senate" and can issue tie-breaking votes.

The senate majority leader sets the schedule for the senate, he is in charge of it.

Is anyone else starting to feel Palin stupidity fatigue? I mean it's something new every day that is just breathtakingly dumb. At this point I'm having trouble continuing to muster the will to keep laughing at her.

i don't know how people can still defend this idiot.

Damn, I guess I was trying too hard to defend Palin for once. :laugh:
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
The tailoring to kids argument doesn't work, because she elaborated and said that the VP 'gets in there and works with the Senators,' so she clearly wasn't generalizing the role she was explaining in full what she thought the VP does.

It would work if she said 'The VP becomes president if the President dies, and he or she is also in charge of the Senate.' I still wouldn't buy it, but you'd have a case.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
I like what the youtube guy posted:

JackieFord22 (14 seconds ago)

For those who say she didn't really "mean it" - keep in mind what she said in her debate: " Im thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the presidents policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are." Ummm... flexible? more authority? Can you say .. Dick Cheney in an up-do?
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Gee, I wonder how she feels about the concept of the Unitary Executive?

I believe that Americans want their President, their commander-in-chief, to have a unitary executive because it is important that our President protects Americans from those--from those who would seek to destroy that unitary Presidency also.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Gee, I wonder how she feels about the concept of the Unitary Executive?

I believe that Americans want their President, their commander-in-chief, to have a unitary executive because it is important that our President protects Americans from those--from those who would seek to destroy that unitary Presidency also.
Shens.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
Originally posted by: frostedflakes
Originally posted by: Farang
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Gee, I wonder how she feels about the concept of the Unitary Executive?

I believe that Americans want their President, their commander-in-chief, to have a unitary executive because it is important that our President protects Americans from those--from those who would seek to destroy that unitary Presidency also.
Shens.

yep.. but the sad thing is I wouldn't be shocked if I heard it