Biden on the Vice Presidency, Cheney & the Constitution


October 2nd, 2008

Update: The McCain camp noted the mistake as well

Article 1: Don’t Ask Joe

Article 1 of the Constitution does not, in fact, define the role of the Vice President of the United States. It defines the role of the legislative branch, otherwise known as the branch in which Joe Biden has served for the last 36 years.

Some other bloggers noted it as well: Science blogs | Malkin

My original post

One thing stood out to me when Joe Biden was discussing the Vice Presidency and the powers it contains in relation to Vice President Dick Cheney’s position on the office. He said:

BIDEN: Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.

He added:

The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he’s part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive and look where it has gotten us. It has been very dangerous.

For those not following, the basic notion attributed to Cheney here is that the Vice President occupies a role as president of the Senate and has a vote when there is a tie. Therefore Cheney argues, the VP is not a part of the Executive Branch.

While I am not going to argue in favor or against Cheney’s interpretation, I found Biden’s argument against this interpretation interesting in that he said “he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch.” The problem is, Article 1 doesn’t define the Executive Branch, Article 2 does that.

Article 1 instead outlines the legislative branch and says of the Vice Presidency:

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States.

A strict interpretation of that would suggest a) the VP is always the President of the Senate but b) only votes during a tie.

Meanwhile article 2, which establishes the Presidency, says that the VP will be elected to the same term. It further outlines powers that are held in the legislative branch for the VP but does not go into much of an executive role.

So, in short, Article I does not establish the Vice President as an entity separate from the legislative branch nor does it place the VP into a sphere specifically designated as an entity of the Executive branch.

Just thought it was interesting.

Sphere: Related Content



Posted in Debates, Joe Biden |

Viewing 23 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    "Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch?"

    This is the question to which Biden is responding. His answer is clearly accurate to that question. I think you need to remove this from your website because your post has nothingto do with the context of the question asked.

    "And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit."

    Nowhere does he state anything remotely close to what you're implying. He says he'sthere to support the President however he can. The only thing the constitution lays out is regarding the legislative branch and his powers with the senate; which is does say explicitly.

    So again, this is a terribly misrepresentative post, and should be taken down.
    • ^
    • v
    How is it misrepresentative? In responding to that question he asserted that Article 1 places the VP in the executive branch and scolded Cheney for not knowing the Constitution. However Article 1 outlines the legislative branch, not the executive. Biden was trying to show superior knowledge of Constitutional law, but in so doing, misquoted the Constitution.
    • ^
    • v
    He was referencing the limiting powers the consitution has on the vice president. It was in responce to Palins admission that she believes the constitution permits wide flexibility for interpretation of amount of power the VP has. He picked the legislative side that the amendment talks about. He didn't say that was the only definition of the limitations of powers. He said it was the limitation in the legislative branch.

    "The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote"

    From the legislative standpoint. He makes it very clear what he is refering to, and you're choosing to ignore that for the purpose of applying is specific reference to an imaginary generalized statement.

    He believes the the VP is an executive position, not legislative. The legislative powers of a VP are stated in that amendment explicitly. Cheney believes he is not part of the executive branch, that he is a legislative body so not subject to the same rules as executive authorities are. This is the point Biden is making here and you're misleading people by not premising the entire context of that part of the speech.
    • ^
    • v
    Think of it this way.

    Cheney: I am not in the executive branch of the presidential administration because the consitution grants me legislative power. Therefore my department is not executive.

    Palin: I agree with Cheney, but the consititution can be further interpreted to grant me more power then cheney.

    Biden: Horse shit. The VP is in the executive branch because the first admendment CLEARLY defines the ONLY role in the legislative branch the VP is given; cast a vote in the event of a tie. There is no room for interpretation. That's the only legislative power the VP has. Because of this amendment, the VP is in the executive branch.
    • ^
    • v
    Here is what your post should have focused on, but you didn't. So I'm goign to guess you're very right wing. If I offend you saying that, I apologize.

    Palin's quote:

    "no. Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very seriously also. I'm 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 president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are"

    Amendment 1 gives no wiggle room. It gives a VERY clear definition that you yourself have posted and commented on. Palin is suggesting it allows for more authority in the legislative branch then it does. It limits the legislative authority of the VP to 1 vote in the senate in the event of the tie. Thats the only power the VP has in the legislative branch.

    So if you want to remain objective and not sound biast, you should take this post down, or at least edit it to show Palin's statement that she thinks she should have more power if she so chooses.
    • ^
    • v
    If you read the blog post, you will see I clearly say "While I am not going to argue in favor or against Cheney’s interpretation," this blog post is not a discussion of Vice Presidential Powers. It is pointing out that Article 1 is not about Executive Powers but legislative. That article makes the VP the president of the Senate and gives him a tie-breaking vote.

    Also it is Article 1, not Amendment 1.

    Additionally, I just want to throw in this point and not get into a giant thing. But my point is this. It would be like saying "VP Cheney believing there should be limits on speech ignores the Second Amendment which clearly defines the freedom of speech." Then I write a post and I say "Listen, the second amendment does not provide freedom of speech. He meant to say the first amendment. The second amendment doesn't guarentee us free speech."

    Then I get a comments saying "Biden was right that we have free speech. You are a right wing nutjob for saying otherwise." Yes we have free speech in that example, but he had the wrong amendment.

    If everyone wants to debate VP powers and the candidates views, let me know and I will start a blog post and we can talk. OR if you want to discuss amongst yourselves here, fine. But I was pointing out a mistake. Article 1 does not make the VP part of an executive branch. You can argue Article 2 does that but Article 1 creates a legislative branch and makes the VP the president of one part of that legislature and gives him a vote in a specific circumstance.
    • ^
    • v
    dodging the fact of what Palin said and the frame of reference throguh which Biden was refering by correcting article vs amendment certainly does not strengthen your argument.

    You're right when you say it's not about executive powers. It's about the only legislative power the VP has, which is why it's an executive position. Once again, he is talking about Palins quote:

    "I'm 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"

    No you don't Sarah, ARTICLE 1 says you're in the executive branch because all you get to do is cast a tie breaking vote. Not shape policy with the senate.

    You're taking a comment out of context to make it something else.
    • ^
    • v
    maybe the fact that you're getting so many responses on the VP powers side of the coin is because the comment you've extrapolated from the debate is directly tied to Palins belief of interpretive authority in legislative branch of government.

    Biden reigned her in citing the specific limitations set for in ARTICLE 1.
    • ^
    • v
    The Quote:

    "The idea he (CHENEY) doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States (IT DOES), that’s the Executive Branch (ARTICLE 1 IS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, HE CITED THE WRONG ARTICLE). He works in the Executive Branch (I am not denying this fact). He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."

    He was FOLLOWING her question, but he was ARGUING that the interpretation that the VP Cheney should have more legislative power is flawd by citing the wrong Article and asserting that article places the VP in the executive Branch.

    He should have said, Article 2 places the VP in the Executive Branch, as is historically accepted and the VP's very limited and ceremonial legislative powers are derived from Article 1.
    • ^
    • v
    Tim is right. The more you argue the more you look like an idiot. Look at the question. She was talking about the role as President of the Senate that is clearly outlined in Article I.

    This is my real problem with Republicans now-a-days. You are anti-intellectual. Gone are the days of Buckley, O'Rourke and Will. Now we are left with a bunch of guys and gals that spew talking points instead of thoughts.

    After watching that debate last night and listening to the radio comments from conservatives on the way in this morning I have decided who the Republican base is. They are the same people that place "My Kid can Beat Up you Honor Student" bumper stickers on their car.

    Hey look if you want to be part of the party of folksy charm that makes fun of people that are educated, that is cool. Just realize which side you are on.
    • ^
    • v
    No he shouldn't have referenced Article 2, as they were discussing the legislative branch. She wanted to take on more power in the legislative branch of government by saying what she said. Biden called her on it and the VP is executive because the only legislative power a VP has is clearly written in Article 1 regarding tie breaking votes, and thats it.
    • ^
    • v
    I agree with this blog post, and I want to add that I think it's a bit hilarious that a liberal is trying to read the Constitution literally to begin with, since they just *love* judges that interpret the Constitution literally <sarcasm>.
    • ^
    • v
    Yeah, them there gosh darn liberal love the spit all over the constitution. They wanna take away are guns by golly and that's against the second - wait, what's that? Bush wants to wiretap my phone without a warrant and then hold me as an "enemy combatant" without pressing charges? - well, that's not the same - he's withholding my rights to protect my freedom!
    • ^
    • v
    We do *love* judges that interpret the Constitution literally - it is conservative judges trying to outlaw abortion and gay marriage when the Constitution does not stipulate that it should be so. Conservatives don't want strict interpretation, THEY WANT THEIR INTERPRETATION, you idiot!
    • ^
    • v
    Yeah...Article one defines the sum total of the Veep's role in the Legislative branch, which Joe then outlined quite perfectly. Perhaps you should listen to his WHOLE statement and put some basic thought into what he's saying before mouthing off on the interwebz.

    FAIL.
    • ^
    • v
    Article I does establish the VP's role in the legislative branch based on what you just cited. You're an idiot and a troll.
    • ^
    • v
    I have to agree with Tim on this. Biden made the point that if you go to Article I of the constitution (see section 3), the only role the VP has in congress is to break a tie vote in the Senate. If I recall, the question was about Cheney's definition of the VP, which is that the VP is part of the Senate... He could have worded it more clearly. He should have said "the role of the VP as a president of the senate as defined in Article I is ONLY to break a tie vote, he can't introduce bills etc...." But I think his point was rather clear. Especially compared to jibberish his opponent was spouting off. I mean, why was Palin referring to what a general from the Civil War thought about Iraq? We know who she was talking about. Why call her on it? So she made a slip up. Who gives a shit. We can blatantly misinterpret the shit candidates say (when their intention was clear) all we want, but it's not the sort of constructive dialog this country needs, although it's pretty much all we get.
    • ^
    • v
    why don't you ask Obama about the Constitution? he taught Constitutional Law for 10 years. ouch!
    • ^
    • v
    Biden appeared "substantive"...but that doesn't mean what he said was correct or true (or honest, AKA his position on Iraq prior to joining the Obama ticket).
    • ^
    • v
    He's been completely forthright with his position. Go back to the beginning (in 2002 when McCain was pushing for Iraq intervention) and look at Biden's quote. Then follow him throughout the war. He's been extremely consistent in that position.
    • ^
    • v
    Article 2 places the VP squarely in the Executive branch:
    " The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:"

    Article 1 assigns tie breaking voting rights as President of the Senate...

    Stop the diatribe of misinformation....
    • ^
    • v
    1. Joe Biden did not think American audiences know anything about the Constitution and therefore utilized the opportunity to bash his vice president in front of the whole wide world. (Hoping that will help his ticket) If he was to quote the constitution, shouldn't he do a better job? If a person listens to the lies long enough, he/she will believe it. Didn't the liberal media do it every day.

    2. He did think that he is smarter than most; he misquoted more than a dozen times. Check out the bills voted YES or NO by different senators. Unbiased media would have corrected Joe Biden.

    http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/a_... (navigate the site)

    3. I gave him an A for acting skill "Sat at the table..". That's interesting to me that he could stoop so low.

    I am disappointed.
    • ^
    • v
    Sometimes it's knowing what's important that counts.

    By finding one "error" you've managed to ignore the critical point Joe Biden made. Dick Cheney is probably the most dangerous Vice President in history. Sarah Palin saying she agrees with Cheney's views on expansion of the vice president's powers - scares the hell out of people.
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

Upcoming Events

Presidential Debates


Presidential Debates

* September 26: Oxford, Mississippi
* October 2 (VP): St. Louis, Missouri
* October 7: Nashville, Tennessee
* October 15: Hempstead, New York