Editorial: Trump’s Behavior Prompts Proposal for New Panel under 25th Amendment

Many Americans have questioned Donald Trump’s fitness to serve as President of the United States since before he took office, but even with that aside, his recent hospitalization for COVID-19 (and his subsequent antics) have prompted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Md.) to draft legislation under the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, establishing a commission that would allow Congress to intervene to relieve an unfit president of his or her duties.

Last week, President Trump was diagnosed with COVID-19, briefly hospitalized, and given a series of experimental treatments that are understood to be reserved for seriously ill patients. While he was in the hospital, he remained on the job with no provision for Vice President Pence to assume even temporary executive duty. The 25th Amendment lays out the process for a president to voluntarily transfer executive authority to the vice president during times when the president is unable to carry out his or her duties, including during a medical event or procedure.

The aim of the 25th Amendment is to ensure continuity of power, should a president die, become unable to perform his or her duties, or resign. In addition to a president’s voluntary transfer of authority, the 25th Amendment provides that, by joint agreement between the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet, “or of such other body as Congress,” a sitting president could be declared “disabled,” and removed from office involuntarily.

The 25th Amendment limits the power of Congress in such situations, and the legislation put forth by Pelosi and Raskin would create a commission to determine whether Donald Trump is fit to carry out his duties as president, or should be removed from office.

Though they may be difficult to distinguish from Trump’s usual behavior and lack of impulse control, Trump’s recent barrage of angry and unstable-sounding tweets, self-aggrandizing and confusing video messages, and reckless behavior during his illness while still contagious, have concerned even many of his staff members.

Among Trump’s recent erratic video messages was one resembling an infomercial, touting the antibody treatment Regeneron. “We have hundreds of thousands of doses, and they’re just about ready,” Trump said, promising that the treatment would be free to all who need it.

Trump tweeted an abrupt halt to talks underway between Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin about a coronavirus relief package, then partially reversed the halt. He also announced that he would not be participating in the upcoming debate with Joe Biden after learning that the debate would be held virtually.

The president, scoffing at public health guidelines from his own administration, has returned to the Oval Office, placing the entire White House staff in danger of contracting the potentially deadly virus from their boss. As of Friday morning, at least “34 White House staffers and other contacts” have tested positive for COVID-19, according to a memo from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Yet Trump refuses to wear a mask, and says he plans to return to the campaign trail as early as this weekend.

Nancy Pelosi has expressed concern that Trump is experiencing a “disassociation from reality.” Others have questioned whether Trump is suffering “roid rage” as a result of his COVID-19 treatments, which includes Dexamethasone, a steroid.

“Trump is, shall we say, in an altered state right now,” said Pelosi. “The disassociation from reality would be funny if it weren’t so deadly.”

The legislation that Pelosi and Raskin are introducing, the Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of Office Act, would “enable Congress to help ensure effective and uninterrupted leadership in the highest office in the Executive Branch of government,” according to the office of Pelosi.

The reality, however, is that, though Pelosi and Raskin could create a commission to examine the health of the president, and his fitness for office, the House of Representatives would need the agreement of not only the vice president, but also members of the cabinet. Pelosi knows that this is not likely, at least not before the election.

“I don’t think it would work for this president — this presidency,” said Pelosi.

Still, passage of the Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of Office Act, even if only by the House of Representatives, would be a first step that needs to be taken at this time to protect the office of the presidency. Amid a sea of complicit and enabling GOP lawmakers who will likely continue to disregard the 25th Amendment, even as the president’s instability glares at them, this legislation is a statement that Donald Trump’s actions are placing the U.S. in jeopardy, and we need a plan.

Nancy Pelosi suggests future 25th Amendment discussion on Donald Trump’s fitness for office | Guardian News [2020-10-08]

What The 25th Amendment Says If The President Cannot Serve | NBC News NOW | [2020-10-02]

Editorial: The Protecting Our Democracy Act Seeks to Curb Would-be Autocrats

As instances of using “autocrat” and “Donald Trump” in the same sentence grow more frequent, House Democrats are taking action with a reform bill dubbed the “Protecting Our Democracy Act.” Designed to strengthen the power of Congress to check the executive branch, the Protecting Our Democracy Act is a package of wide-ranging reforms to curb abuses of power, especially by the president.

For generations, we Americans have tended to think of the U.S., as we know it, as infallible. Most of us thought that concepts like “checks and balances” were firmly protected by the U.S. Constitution. It was unimaginable that a U.S. president would think he could get away with trying to be an authoritarian leader, let alone garner unquestioning support for attempting it.

Many Americans were tuned in to the hints that Donald Trump had an autocratic bent even before he was elected—his kidding on the square about being in office for three or more terms…his stoking of fear of immigrants, and his declaration of “I alone can fix it.” Still, we thought, what’s the worst that could happen? Surely, if he went too far, he’d be batted down by the rule of law, or, worst case, we’d elect a new president when his term was up.

But he did go too far— again and again. And now, we’re worried that even if we do elect a new president, Donald Trump will refuse to leave the Oval Office. He has already begun sowing seeds of doubt about the integrity of the 2020 election to ensure that if he doesn’t win re-election, his supporters will back him in rejecting the results. He has joked on numerous occasions about doing away with his term limit, and when asked, he refuses to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if defeated.

Trump fires those who disagree with him, and pardons his corrupt friends. He has weaponized the Justice Department, politicized the military, and welcomed foreign interference in two presidential elections. He requires loyalty to Trump over loyalty to country.

Donald Trump’s presidency has had the effect of revealing the inadequacies in our government when it comes to protecting our Democracy. In fairness, our founding fathers had faith in Americans to exercise common sense and to expect common sense and integrity from our leaders. They knew that human beings like Donald Trump existed, even then; hence, the provisions they created for the branches of government to keep each other in check. They would have expected a leader such as Trump to be hastily and roundly removed from office. But we have outgrown some aspects of the government our founders laid out for us, evolving in some ways, and devolving in others. We have found ourselves not only led by the exact type of despot our founding fathers wanted to protect against, but also with a Congress that is full of his sycophantic enablers.

The Protecting Our Democracy Act is a response to Donald Trump and those who aid and abet him. It is a reform bill that Democrats hope will prevent the executive’s abuse of power from ever happening again in America.

According to a joint statement issued by Seven Democratic House committee chairs, the legislation is intended to “prevent future presidential abuses, restore our checks and balances, strengthen accountability and transparency, and protect our elections.”

“It is time for Congress to strengthen the bedrock of our democracy and ensure our laws are strong enough to withstand a lawless president,” the statement says. “These reforms are necessary not only because of the abuses of this president, but because the foundation of our democracy is the rule of law and that foundation is deeply at risk.”

The Protecting Our Democracy Act includes, among many other reforms, measures to regulate the relationship between the president and the Justice Department (Trump currently uses Attorney General Bill Barr to do his personal bidding, rather than representing the American people); protect whistleblowers and inspectors general, curb the president’s power to grant pardons, strengthen the ability to enforce congressional subpoenas, and protect against foreign election interference. It aims to prevent an American president from going rogue, abusing the office of the president, and fostering an environment of corruption in the executive branch.

Though the Protecting Our Democracy Act likely won’t receive a vote before the election, and probably wouldn’t be considered by a Republican-led Senate, it is a significant move toward reforms that could be put in place should Joe Biden be elected president, and/or should the Senate majority flip from Republican to Democratic. If neither happens, and Donald Trump is re-elected, the window for stopping Donald Trump’s autocratic ambition may begin to close. The future of our country is in unprecedented peril, and its fate depends on how many lawmakers are interested in protecting our democracy over enabling a lawless president.

The Protecting Our Democracy Act | Rep. Adam Schiff [2020-09-23]

Chairwoman Maloney’s Remarks at Press Conference on introducing the ‘Protecting Our Democracy Act’ | Oversight Committee [2020-09-23]