Is the v.p. part of the executive branch?

[The Dowager Mod]

The Office of Vice President Dick Cheney told an agency within the National Archives that for purposes of securing classified information, the Vice President's office is not an 'entity within the executive branch' according to a letter released Thursday by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Cheney_tells_agency_that_Vice_Presidents_0621.html?idiot

[David S]

The VP is part of the executive branch despite what the VP says..

Although I hear that if you disagree with the VP's position he will explain it to you on his next duck hunting trip. (Tip - bring your bullet proof underwear.)

[SPC]

Well, technically yes, though it is also part of the legislative branch.

[Padfoot]

This is a prime example of this administration's lack of respect for the Constitution.  Bush and his cronies have completely ignored the document in order to grab power and cover their own asses.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Yes - although it's also somewhat part of hte Leg. Branch too.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Constitutionally, I say Dick is correct.  His sole constitutional functions are to be part of the presidential succession, as are the Speaker and the PPT and to be President of the Senate.  Indeed one could argue that under our separation of powers doctrine the various executive branch duties that have been added to the office since World War II are unconstitutional.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Of course the position of Vice President of the United States is apart of the Executive branch of Government. However on a techniqicallity Dick Cheney is President because he's controlling Bush!

[Smash255]

This is a prime example of this administration's lack of respect for the Constitution.  Bush and his cronies have completely ignored the document in order to grab power and cover their own asses.

^^^^^

[MODU]

This is a prime example of this administration's lack of respect for the Constitution.  Bush and his cronies have completely ignored the document in order to grab power and cover their own asses.

From my understanding, the National Archives' Information Security Oversight Office is not set out by the Constitution in any form, so it isn't a "lack of respect for the Constitution."  It was created by an executive order about 10 years ago.

As far as Cheney's office saying they are not an "agency," which the order creating the Oversight office indicates they are to deal with, he is correct.  The office of the VP is not an executive-level agency.  As far as the office not being an "entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information," I think that is a stretch.  Obviously the office of the VP deals with classified information.  Now, do they possess classified information?  I do not know.  They might have another division which deals solely with classified document handling, so that might be an accurate statement, however even I would make the assumption that the VP office has their own storage capabilities.

[Emsworth]

The Constitution of the United States does not create or define an "executive branch," or for that matter a "legislative branch" or a "judicial branch." These are simply terms of convenience in political theory; they have no constitutional significance whatsoever. Thus, the notion that the Vice President is "constitutionally" correct or incorrect is quite misguided.

The resolution of this problem, therefore, is not a constitutional question; it is a question of interpreting the Executive Order. The order applies to:

"any 'Executive agency,' as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105; any 'Military department' as defined in 5 U.S.C. 102; and any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information."

Let us ignore for a moment the executive agency and military department categories. Let us focus instead on the third category: "entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information." Other parts of the order's text suggest very strongly that the Vice President is included, at least in some instances. There are numerous distinct uses of the phrase "Vice President in the performance of executive duties" (or some variant thereof). Thus, the most reasonable interpretation of the order is that the Vice President is subject to the regulations when he is acting as Vice President, and not subject to them if he receives any classified information while acting as President of the Senate.

[The Dowager Mod]

Washington, D.C. – House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel issued the following statement regarding his amendment to cut funding for the Office of  the Vice President from the bill that funds the executive branch. The legislation – the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill -- will be considered on the floor of the House of Representatives next week.

"The Vice President has a choice to make. If he believes his legal case, his office has no business being funded as part of the executive branch. However, if he demands executive branch funding he cannot ignore executive branch rules. At the very least, the Vice President should be consistent. This amendment will ensure that the Vice President's funding is consistent with his legal arguments. I have worked closely with my colleagues on this amendment and will continue to pursue this measure in the coming days."

[J. J.]

He clearly is an much a part of the legislative branch as the Speaker of the House.  I would also point out that various congressional oversight committees would see classified information, so if we're using that test, either the intelligence committees are part of the Executive branch or the VP's office isn't.

[Emsworth]

He clearly is an much a part of the legislative branch as the Speaker of the House.

That does not mean that the Vice President is not also a member of the "executive branch" as well. The executive order specifically speaks of the Vice President's "executive duties."

[Conan]

I'm surprised people are actually defending the vice pres. Hahah. You can't trash over 200 years of history. Hahah. OOOO I guess if Cheney says it, it must be true. ha

[MODU]

I'm surprised people are actually defending the vice pres. Hahah. You can't trash over 200 years of history. Hahah. OOOO I guess if Cheney says it, it must be true. ha

I'm not sure if anyone is "defending" Cheney.  From what I read, we're discussing the technicalities of the issue (for once).  Just because we're not saying OMG CHENEY IS THE DEVIL doesn't mean we're defending him.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I'm surprised people are actually defending the vice pres. Hahah. You can't trash over 200 years of history. Hahah. OOOO I guess if Cheney says it, it must be true. ha

More like 60 years of history.  It was only after World War II that the Vice Presidential was formally granted any sort of role in the executive branch beyond the types of oversight and advisory roles that are granted other Congressional officials as well.

[Conan]

I'm surprised people are actually defending the vice pres. Hahah. You can't trash over 200 years of history. Hahah. OOOO I guess if Cheney says it, it must be true. ha

I'm not sure if anyone is "defending" Cheney.  From what I read, we're discussing the technicalities of the issue (for once).  Just because we're not saying OMG CHENEY IS THE DEVIL doesn't mean we're defending him.

THat wasn't my point. Some people are hinting that he actually has some points on this issue.  The only point he has is that he has a dual role. However, this doesnt change the fact that out of over 200 years of history, this has never been the case.  The issue of what branch of government he comes from has little to do with him. One is either right, that he is in the executive branch, or one is either dead wrong, he is correct. There are no real technicalities to this issue. It is a first and is so out of the blue.

[??????????]

I'm surprised people are actually defending the vice pres. Hahah. You can't trash over 200 years of history. Hahah. OOOO I guess if Cheney says it, it must be true. ha

I'm not sure if anyone is "defending" Cheney.  From what I read, we're discussing the technicalities of the issue (for once).  Just because we're not saying OMG CHENEY IS THE DEVIL doesn't mean we're defending him.

THat wasn't my point. Some people are hinting that he actually has some points on this issue.  The only point he has is that he has a dual role. However, this doesnt change the fact that out of over 200 years of history, this has never been the case.  The issue of what branch of government he comes from has little to do with him. One is either right, that he is in the executive branch, or one is either dead wrong, he is correct. There are no real technicalities to this issue. It is a first and is so out of the blue.

Read what Ernest wrote...if you don't understand it, slowly re-read it.

[Mr. Paleoconservative]

Though he is part of the Executive Branch, as an elected Constitutional Officer of the United States, the President would be hard pressed to apply an executive order involving disclosure of information exclusively regarding the Office of the Vice President, if the Vice President does not wish to disclose that information.

It would appear that from this perspective only the Supreme Court could force the Vice President to comply with that type of order from the President, who's executive orders on matters such as the one cited in the article should only apply to his Administration and the departments directly under his authority.  That authority over the Executive Branch does not include authority over the Office of the Vice President.

[Wakie]

What I find terribly fascinating about this case is that Cheney reclassifies where the VP office exists depending on what is convenient for him at that time.

He refused to turn over notes from his meetings with the heads of various energy companies (including the good folks at Enron) citing "Executive Privilege" and saying that the VP's office is an arm of the President's.  Now he FLIPFLOPS on it and says that it isn't.

Look, realistically there is no such thing as Presidential oversight any more.  But I'd like Cheney to get his story straight for once.

[Likely Voter]

Hasn't Cheney claimed 'executive privilege' with regards to various things. Maybe he is in the executive branch on only the even numbered days

from section II 'Executive Branch' of the USC

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Hasn't Cheney claimed 'executive privilege' with regards to various things. Maybe he is in the executive branch on only the even numbered days

from section II 'Executive Branch' of the USC

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

You need to go back and take grammar, since you seemingly don't even know what a sentence is, let alone how to parse one.  The first sentence says that the President alone is the fount of executive Power.  The second sentence pertains to how the President is elected and that part of the sentence you bolded indicates that by the way, the Vice-President gets elected as part of the same process.  Nothing whatsoever there to indicate that the Vice-President has any executive Power or authority.

[Likely Voter]

^^^^

dude this whole thing is a joke...do you really need to resort to flaming...that is seriously uncalled for.

[J. J.]

He clearly is an much a part of the legislative branch as the Speaker of the House.

That does not mean that the Vice President is not also a member of the "executive branch" as well. The executive order specifically speaks of the Vice President's "executive duties."

I would note that the Speaker has some "executive duties," e.g. appointing and dismission certain officers of the House.

The question is, should this Executive Order, promulgated by the President, be extended to the office of the Vice President?   The President, who wrote the order, says no.  The rest of the point is moot because even if the VP is part of the executive, the issuer of the order can exempt from its effect.

[Emsworth]

I would note that the Speaker has some "executive duties," e.g. appointing and dismission certain officers of the House.

Firstly, choosing officers is clearly a legislative task, authorized under the rule-making power granted to each house by the Constitution. Secondly, I am not aware that the Speaker receives any classified information in that particular capacity (although I might be mistaken on this point).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Simply "saying so" has no legal effect. Even if both houses of Congress, together with the President, "say" something, the law is not changed. Likewise, a mere statement from the President does not affect the meaning of an executive order; a new order must be issued, if any amendment is to be made.