Much has been made by Republicans and supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders that a Hillary Clinton presidency would look a lot like a third Obama term.
But some are whispering concerns that it amounts to a third term of Bill Clinton’s presidency, challenging the 22nd Amendment barring third terms.
“It’s not healthy for our system,” said pollster John Zogby, a registered Democrat.
He said few are talking about the issue, but “they should be because he still has the perks of the presidency and there is the dynastic aspect to it, at least in form, if probably not legally.”
For the Clintons, the issue is one they’ve toyed with for years. During his 1992 presidential bid, they talked about a “two for the price of one” presidency. It prompted the New York Times and Huffington Post to raise concerns about the 22nd Amendment.
“Hillary’s election would not violate the letter of the 22nd Amendment; she has never been elected before. Nevertheless, the amendment is a political problem because it is a constitutional embodiment of a vaguer political thought that eight years is enough,” the HuffPost said at the time.
Since leaving office, Bill Clinton has championed killing the 22nd Amendment. And Hillary Clinton has recently suggested putting her husband in charge of the economy to revive his main success and role during his own two terms.
A second Clinton presidency would be different than the recent Bush presidencies. George W. Bush made a point of keeping his father at arm’s length, even fashioning his two terms after Ronald Reagan. With the Clintons, there is the potential for two presidents sleeping in the same bed.
“I think that this raises a lot of uncomfortable issues for the rest of us and for them,” Zogby said.
For example, to duck criticism, he said that Bill Clinton would have to avoid taking an official office, talking to Congress and pushing his own agenda.
“He can’t have any role with Congress. It’s one thing to be an ad hoc trouble shooter, but now with Congress, that’s for the president,” he said.
And he can’t talk about big policy either, said the pollster, raising another issue. “How does Bill Clinton dodge questions when he’s right there in the White House? He can’t and he won’t.”
A scholar on the millennial generation, Zogby said the Clinton-Clinton presidential issue is one that many families are living through. “This is almost like a millennial situation where the kid comes home and lives in the basement. He still is a kid.”
Judges, lawyers like cameras in court
Pressure is building on federal courts to install cameras now that a government report has found that judges and lawyers in courts with video operations believe it is educational and doesn’t interfere with cases.
The report from the Government Accountability Office included several surprising findings that seem to endorse expanded use of cameras, even the U.S. Supreme Court.
In interviews with federal and state judges and lawyers that practice in those courts, the GAO report provided evidence to challenge many of the Supreme Court’s arguments against cameras and live audio.
For example, most of the judges and attorneys said that cameras didn’t prompt people to act up. Also, most said that video and live audio was educational and provided good public transparency.
Judges and lawyers, however, agreed that the media had a tendency to distort the actions in the court caught on camera. But some said the media took things out of context even without having audio or video.
The report was cheered by C-SPAN, which for years has pushed for courtroom cameras, especially in the Supreme Court.
General Counsel Bruce Collins told the Washington Examiner that the report ” found, as have most observers over many years, that TV in the courts does not interfere with the administration of justice. Should the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledge this history and allow C-SPAN to televise its arguments, we are confident this history will repeat itself.”
Clarence Thomas may be next to leave Supreme Court
Justice Clarence Thomas, a reliable conservative vote on the Supreme Court, is mulling retirement after the presidential election, according to court watchers.
Thomas, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush and approved by the Senate after a bitter confirmation, has been considering retirement for a while and never planned to stay until he died, they said. He likes to spend summers in his RV with his wife.
His retirement would have a substantial impact on control of the court. The next president is expected to immediately replace the seat opened by the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, providing a one-vote edge in the court that is currently divided 4-4.
Should Thomas leave, that slight majority would continue if Donald Trump becomes president. If it’s Hillary Clinton, then she would get the chance to flip two Republican seats, giving the liberals a 6-3 majority.
And, conservatives fear, that could switch to a 7-2 majority if Republican Justice Anthony Kennedy, already a swing vote, retires. He will be 80 next year.
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner’s “Washington Secrets” columnist, can be contacted at [email protected]
