than have someone ostensibly much less familar with how things might play out. In as intense a situation as an attack that killed the president and vice president, the speaker of the house could hope to be nothing more than a figurehead anyway. A predefined successor would theoretically be well versed in how to coordinate an effective, efficient and timely response. And since no one can be appointed indefinitely, I have no problem with a temporary plan of succession like this.

Duh, That's why the succesor needs to be named ahead of time. That person can than be trained and up to speed instead of the President picking his brother in law..

Oh, yarite, like Lin Biao in China or Jaing Ching in China, both hand picked "successors", or say Molotov was Stalin's chosen successor.

Brain dead idiots, all of you, and aristocrats, too...I suppose Mr. Bush would pick his brother, Jeb, and then the Bush's would be kings and queens, right?

Wow, that's an insightful response, thanks. No, the successor is obviously somebody in the cabinet like the National Security Advisor of the Secretary of State.

No, that is not the point. When s/he chooses a vice president and cabinet, the president IS ALREADY appointing a line of successors, all of whom are subject to direct or indirect voter approval (via Senate confirmation). I actually advocate removing the Speaker and Pro Tem from the succession (for separation of powers reasons) and adding a Designated Successor position -- appointed by the President and approved by the Senate just like the rest of the executive branch. These people would receive daily briefings, have Secret Service protection, and (most importantly) LIVE OUTSIDE THE DC AREA. We currently have five people who have served as president and/or vice president who are still constitutionally eligible to act as president. (Carter, Mondale, Bush Sr., Quayle, Gore) These, along with former secretaries of state, chiefs of staff, etc. would be natural candidates for this position. But it would be public.

What is at issue in this article is whether the president gets to appoint a secret contingency successor and under what type of scenario that person would serve. I don't see the military backing the person named in a secret executive order OVER a competent, legal successor who is available to serve. If the military WERE to participate in that kind of coup, then nothing we could do legislatively would rememdy this as they'd be operating completely outside the law.

What I do see happening is making sure someone is holding the fort temporarily while the fate of those in the legal succession are unknown. The next person in line could be missing, or temporarily incapacitated. They could serve until the legal successor is located.

I could also see (though we would need Congress to legalize it) formally creating the position of Secret Designated Successor. That position would fall at the end of the current succession and would address the unfortunate fact that all the known successors are inherently targets. But I want to emphasize that the holder(s) of this position would still need to be approved by a Senate committee with appropriate security clearances, the way we deal with other secret, national security matters.

If Bush wants to smooth out the hypothetical situation that would occur if both he and Cheney were taken out simultaneously, he could explicitly designate a person or group to advise and assist the LEGAL successor to executive power, rather than violate the law of the land by arbitrarily naming some official NOT named in the Act.

Then again, Bush & Co. aren't particularly concerned with the law, that just applies to "little people."

If the law is probably unconstitutional, and the required legal battle more than likely unnecessary based on the implausiblity of the circumstances triggering the event, doesn't a secret executive order sound like the practical way to go. Sounds like prudent planning to me since I doubt the president and vice-president ever get knocked out at the same time, and if they do, this kind of legal squabbling would be the least of my worries.

I am pretty sure that 8 years ago most of the people arguing about how unjust this is would have found it to be sound policy by Bill Clinton with a republican speaker of the house...

"if the law is probably unconstitutional" then the law needs to be challenged and changed, not undermined behind closed doors. There's a reason we HAVE written laws, after all... so that the law is visible and open to all and can't be changed at the whim of whoever might be in power today.

Our founding fathers had a few good ideas... just ask Scalia, he'd wax rhapsodic telling you how great they were. I don't think this alleged secret succession plan is a good thing now, I don't think it would have been a good thing when Blowjob Bill was in office, and I don't think it was a good thing when Reagan was in office either.

If succession act needs to be changed, it needs to be changed in the open, with our elected representatives answerable to the voters for the results. If its constitutionality is to be challenged, it needs to be done NOW, while there is no question of a succession event, and that needs to be done in the light of day as well.

The fact is, the law says that the predefined successor is the speaker of the house. The fact that the current speaker happens to be someone you don't like doesn't mean you get to ignore the constitution. If you want to change the order of succession, then you have to offer up an amendment.

I realize that following the constitution is a difficult concept for followers of this administration, but that's how our government is supposed to work.

while I agree with you that the question should be presented to the courts, I also think there are about 3000 things they and everybody around here should worry about first. At least now it might be on the list.

or challenge it in court...

WG: My fellow Americans, my name is Wendell Golgefrinchum. I know you don't know me, but, well, I'm the Secret Designated Successor and I have some very bad news to share with you.... Hey! What the?

CEC: My fellow Americans, my name is C. Everett Crab. I know you don't know me, but, well, I'm the Secret Designated Successor and, because the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, Senate President pro tem and the entire Cabinet were killed in a freak pie-eating contest mishap, I am now your President. And I am ordering the military to detain Wendell Golgefrinchum.

Happy times, there.

You could challenge the presidential succession act in court if you want. I'm not sure if that's a good idea if the country were in the middle of a major crisis spurned on by the deaths of both the president and the VP. And quite frankly, if the cabinet and the speaker were from different party, a challenge that point would look like a naked partisan attempt to keep power rather than follow the law.

Also, there's no reason to think that the speaker isn't knowledgeable about the current situation. The executive branch is supposed to keep the legislative branch fully briefed at all times.

Still, what I would prefer would be an amendment that, in the event of the death of both the president and the VP, a designated successor chosen by law (not executive order) takes over temporarily and then emergency elections would be held in six months to choose a new president.