Hillary IS NOT eligible to be Sec. of State

According to Article 1 section 6 of the United States Constitution:

Section. 6. The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

Since all US government officials received a raise last year approved by both US Houses according to the Constitution Hillary cannot be appointed to Sec. of State. Doesn't anybody in Washington read the US Constitution ? Maybe I am reading it in a different way then they are.........or maybe I am reading it with my eyes OPEN.





[edit on 26-11-2008 by omega007]

You might have to spell this one out because I see no where that says she couldn't. Could be I'm misinterpreting a word or 2 though.

What Constitution the congress used it for toilet paper years ago.

Seriously, I think you maybe correct. Of course she will quit congress and then be declared eligible even though she is not. Given her terrible personality according to the secret service, I really hope he picks someone with better self-control and manners.

She won't be keeping her senatorial seat.

The measures you outlined are to keep the executive branch separate from the legislative branch... ie nobody can be a senator/ congressman at the same time as being an appointed official acting under the President.

But that isnt an issue, since she will be resigning her New York senatorial seat.

Sorry to disagree........The second paragraph states that NO elected Senator can be appointed to a position that while in office gave a raise to that position. It is very clearly stated. Read it again. She cannot be appointed as Sec of State and is very clearly stated in the second paragraph of Article 1 section 6.

Um this has been worked around before. All they have to do is reduce the Sec of States salary to that which it was before she voted to raise it. It's been done many times before.

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
She won't be keeping her senatorial seat.

The measures you outlined are to keep the executive branch separate from the legislative branch... ie nobody can be a senator/ congressman at the same time as being an appointed official acting under the President.

But that isnt an issue, since she will be resigning her New York senatorial seat.

Ya I just looked it up and found out if it's offered she can resign her current seat.

Well then she should fit right in to this Obama Cabinet, as Obama aint qualified or allowed under our Laws t be president. He was not born in Hawaii and most logical and reasonable people that don't live off CNN and FOX sound bytes know this very thing. Hell there are a few threads inhere about it and the Supremes Conferencing on that very issue Dec 5.

If I can quote a Rock Band here I would like to:
IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT, AND I FEEL FINE!

reply to post by Darthorious


Incorrect............the purpose of this section is to keep Senators from creating government jobs for themselves and also increasing the salary of government positions they will be appointed too. It has nothing to do with seperation of powers.

Originally posted by omega007
Sorry to disagree........The second paragraph states that NO elected Senator can be appointed to a position that while in office gave a raise to that position. It is very clearly stated. Read it again. She cannot be appointed as Sec of State and is very clearly stated in the second paragraph of Article 1 section 6.

In legal terms, she is not appointed to the position of Sec. of State until she actually takes up the job role...despite the fact that, publically, it has been anounced that she WILL BE appointed to that picture...

As others have pointed out, she cannot hold both positions at the same time...and she will not do so.

As she is not CURRENTLY the Sec. of State, there is no problem with her still being a Senator.

reply to post by madhatr137


Again I disagree.........the section clearly states a Senator cannot be appointed to a position in government that a raise in pay was given while in office. Even if she resigns, and is not a Senator, she was when the raise was approved........she is not constitutionally eligible.

And I understand that the Constitution never stood in the way of those in Washington DC.......but none the less......it is the LAW.

They'll just use the Saxbe fix and everything will be fine. That's why it was created.

When you read the document, be sure you know what has gone on since it was written, my friends. That's why you can't become a lawyer just by memorizing the Constitution. There's a lot more going on than any of us will ever be able to keep up with. The only solution to this situation is to rewrite all the laws into a clear, simple and neat tome in plain English. It shouldn't require years of study and entire libraries to shelve its evolution. After all, you're responsible for knowing those laws, remember?

Put your congressman on speed dial.

reply to post by CosmicEgg


I do understand that they are allowing it due to the "Saxbe fix" which has never been challenged in the courts. It was merely done by Nixon and also approved by the Senate Committee. They have all kinds of methods of subverting the US Constitution........but that does not make it legal.

Perhaps one day very soon..........things will be taken back to the right track "We the People" will breathe life back into the Constitution.......Oops wait that is revolutionary talk.

reply to post by omega007


Trust me on this one buddy. The grammatical structure of the legislation is thus:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States

This clearly states that she is ineligible as long as she keeps her seat, or until such time as she resigns her senate term of tenure.

The other interesting thing is whether or not that law applies at all, since it only mentions a "he"; while Clinton is a "she". Would be funny if she used that exact legislation to keep her senate seat while simultaneously being Secretary of State.

Please read my previous post. It doesn't matter what was written originally. That's what amendments and all the rest is for. Don't be so naive.

reply to post by CosmicEgg


I did read your previous posting. The Saxbe fix is not an amendment, it is not even a law. It was just done by Nixon and was not challenged. It was also approved by a Senate Committee.......it is not a law and it is not an amendment. If you know of a law or amendment that was passed in relation to Article 1 sect 6 please post it.........I want to know that which is truth.

reply to post by omega007


i understand what you are saying. really i do. but i would like to give you this to think about. laws are laws and are not to be broken;
except when
only if
and, so long as.

it was a job of mine to read laws and figure out what they were trying to say. this is what i have come up. it is all subject to interpretation.

just my .02

Okay look....fuss and fume all you like. The Saxbe fix was used already in 1909 - before it got its name. You don't think there's sufficient precedent to allow it to be used again? Where is that turnip wagon you fell off? We need to get you back on it before you hurt yourself.

reply to post by 44soulslayer

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
reply to post by omega007

 

Trust me on this one buddy. The grammatical structure of the legislation is thus:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States

This clearly states that she is ineligible as long as she keeps her seat, or until such time as she resigns her senate term of tenure.

Could that not be interpreted to mean:

She was elected to be Senator until 2010, at which time she would have to run for re-election.

She cannot be SoS until 2010.

Just askin'...

Well Obama is the president now so he's gonna go ahead and do what he wants.