3 ms·

The US doesn't have a prime minister at all. The president is head of the cabinet, they get to appoint all the heads of the various departments, and then the se

The US doesn't have a prime minister at all. The president is head of the cabinet, they get to appoint all the heads of the various departments, and then the senate confirms them. The cabinet heads are usually not even from congress, they're often just random governors and politicians who lost during the primary voting for the last election and whatnot.

bena 4y ago
That's because, in the US, the Executive Branch is vested in the singular person known as the President. The Cabinet is an optional body comprised of the heads of the various Departments of the Federal government. The Secretaries are confirmed by the Senate, but every other member of the Executive Branch serves at the pleasure of the President. I don't think you can be a Cabinet member and a member of Congress. As Cabinet members are officers of the United States and you cannot hold another office while also being a member of Congress (Article 1, Section 6). It's also why the Presidential Succession Act may be unconstitutional. As the Constitution specifies that only an officer may be designated a successor and members of Congress are explicitly excluded from being officers.
- culturestate 4y ago
  > It's also why the Presidential Succession Act may be unconstitutional. As the Constitution specifies that only an officer may be designated a successor and members of Congress are explicitly excluded from being officers. Given that the first time the Speaker of the House and the Senate president pro tem were proposed as successors under Article II was during the literal 1st Congress in 1792, I think it’s pretty unlikely that any modern court would find that to be unconstitutional. “Many of the actual people who signed the Constitution thought this was okay and demonstrated their belief by introducing legislation to that effect” is about as ironclad a precedent as you can hope to find.
  - bena 4y ago
    Yes, I understand it's been like this for a while, but that doesn't make the law Constitutional. Several things the "actual people who signed the Constitution" did were deemed to be unconstitutional. Why? Because there were many people who ratified the Constitution, each with their own ideas. Even when the 1792 version of the bill was signed, the issue was brought up. By the "actual people who signed the Constitution". And we've never had to actually test the Presidential Succession Act, which is where the courts would decide if it actually meets the Constitutional standard. The fact that it is a law, has been a law for a while, and a version of it has been a law since nearly the beginning of the country has no bearing on whether or not that law is legal.
    - culturestate 4y ago
      > The fact that it is a law, has been a law for a while, and a version of it has been a law since nearly the beginning of the country has no bearing on whether or not that law is legal. This is true! But it’s also immaterial to the point I’m trying to make. I’m not arguing for or against the de jure constitutionality of the law; I’m saying that it’s unlikely any modern-day court would find it within themselves to overrule the de facto state of affairs that was created by the framers themselves.

bena 4y ago

That's because, in the US, the Executive Branch is vested in the singular person known as the President. The Cabinet is an optional body comprised of the heads of the various Departments of the Federal government. The Secretaries are confirmed by the Senate, but every other member of the Executive Branch serves at the pleasure of the President. I don't think you can be a Cabinet member and a member of Congress. As Cabinet members are officers of the United States and you cannot hold another office while also being a member of Congress (Article 1, Section 6). It's also why the Presidential Succession Act may be unconstitutional. As the Constitution specifies that only an officer may be designated a successor and members of Congress are explicitly excluded from being officers.

culturestate 4y ago
> It's also why the Presidential Succession Act may be unconstitutional. As the Constitution specifies that only an officer may be designated a successor and members of Congress are explicitly excluded from being officers. Given that the first time the Speaker of the House and the Senate president pro tem were proposed as successors under Article II was during the literal 1st Congress in 1792, I think it’s pretty unlikely that any modern court would find that to be unconstitutional. “Many of the actual people who signed the Constitution thought this was okay and demonstrated their belief by introducing legislation to that effect” is about as ironclad a precedent as you can hope to find.
- bena 4y ago
  Yes, I understand it's been like this for a while, but that doesn't make the law Constitutional. Several things the "actual people who signed the Constitution" did were deemed to be unconstitutional. Why? Because there were many people who ratified the Constitution, each with their own ideas. Even when the 1792 version of the bill was signed, the issue was brought up. By the "actual people who signed the Constitution". And we've never had to actually test the Presidential Succession Act, which is where the courts would decide if it actually meets the Constitutional standard. The fact that it is a law, has been a law for a while, and a version of it has been a law since nearly the beginning of the country has no bearing on whether or not that law is legal.
  - culturestate 4y ago
    > The fact that it is a law, has been a law for a while, and a version of it has been a law since nearly the beginning of the country has no bearing on whether or not that law is legal. This is true! But it’s also immaterial to the point I’m trying to make. I’m not arguing for or against the de jure constitutionality of the law; I’m saying that it’s unlikely any modern-day court would find it within themselves to overrule the de facto state of affairs that was created by the framers themselves.