Jonathan Bernstein

The top order of business when the House of Representatives returns from recess on Oct. 15 is certain to be the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of President Donald Trump. Here’s something the lawmakers should take care of first: changing the presidential line of succession to remove the speaker of the House and the president pro tempore of the Senate.

The U.S. Constitution specifies that the vice president takes over if a president leaves office. After that, presidential succession is up to Congress, which has changed the procedure several times throughout U.S. history. There are two strong reasons to change the law again now: It’s the best way for the Democrats to handle impeachment, and it’s best for the nation, anyway.

With Trump claiming that the constitutional process of impeachment amounts to a “coup,” it’s a good idea for Democrats to make it as clear as possible that they have no intention of overturning the 2016 election by installing a Democrat in the White House. That’s important because Speaker Nancy Pelosi is second in line to replace Trump under current law, behind Vice President Mike Pence.

A Republican wouldn’t have to be paranoid to imagine the Democrats trying to maneuver past Pence, especially now that Pence’s name has come up as a possible character in the drama at the heart of the impeachment inquiry — the effort to press the president of Ukraine to dig up dirt on Trump’s leading Democratic rival, former Vice President Joe Biden. As long as Pelosi remains in the line of succession and control of the White House is even potentially at stake, Republicans will have an incentive to fight back against a legitimate investigation of Pence’s potential role in the Ukraine scandal.

By taking Pelosi out of the mix, Democrats wouldn’t be giving up a realistic chance of gaining the presidency, anyway. If Trump is impeached by the House and removed by the Senate, Pence will become president and nominate a new vice president. That’s the procedure set forth by the 25th Amendment and used twice since its ratification in 1965.

In other words, by passing a simple bill, Democrats would do what they can to align Republican incentives the way they want. At no cost to themselves.

And it’s the right thing to do from a good-government perspective. It’s always been a mistake to insert members of Congress into the presidential line of succession; it’s contrary to the entire structure of the constitutional system, which separates legislative from executive institutions and forces them to share powers.

The deficiencies in the Constitution were partially fixed by the 12th Amendment, which made sure that the president and vice president would be elected as a linked ticket. They were further partially fixed by the 25th Amendment, which ended any ambiguity about the vice president becoming president in the case of a vacancy and arranged for filling any vacancy in the vice presidency. But unfortunately, the 1792 law inserting two members of Congress into the line of succession (later removed and then restored in 1947 to elevate the House speaker) restored a bit of that ambiguity. It should be removed.

Even with members of Congress removed from the line of succession, there’s still one more step needed to get the system right. Under current law, 15 cabinet officers follow the Senate president pro tem, from the secretary of state at the top of the list to the secretary of homeland security at the bottom.

That’s not appropriate in a world of possible terrorist mayhem and nuclear conflagration. As the Continuity in Government Commission recommended after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, only the four most important cabinet posts should be included. After that, the president should designate, and Congress confirm, a handful of distinguished individuals, preferably living anywhere but Washington, D.C., to serve in case of a full-blown disaster. 

But setting that up — which Congress should do — would require careful drafting and serious debate. By contrast, eliminating Congress from the line of succession could be done quickly. When the Democrats get back to town, they should consider it an important step on the road to a legitimate impeachment of the president.

Get News Alerts delivered directly to you.

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Bernstein is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist.


Load comments