Why is the Speaker of the House 3 in line to be PoTUS, but the Senate has all the power

[GusFring]

I've always been curious about this. Like it or not, the House represents America more than the Senate imo.

[rso]

1. House

The Senate has the exclusive power to confirm Presidential appointees, but the House is where Federal funding originates, so I would not say that the Senate has more power than the House.

[PSPS]

2. The last three years demonstrates that the senate has far more power

Although impossible to achieve, the senate should just be abolished. Some senators have even admitted as much. The house originates spending along with other bills but, without the senate's approval, they go nowhere. Moscow Mitch refers to himself as the "grim reaper" because the senate is "where house bills go to die." Further, the senate can (and is) frantically packing the courts and confirming criminals and foreign agents to governmental posts, and the house has no say in any of that.

Also, every state gets two senators regardless of its population. Wyoming, for example, contains fewer people in the entire state than any medium-sized city. Yet is still has two senators (Wyoming's population is 1.5% of California's, just 12% of Los Angeles alone!) So, in essence, the senate's very existence enables minority rule in the US.

[brooklynite]

9. "The Senate should just be abolished"

I’m sure Newt Gingrich would have applied a very thoughtful standard to judicial appointments.

[GusFring]

8. I'll give up funding for this kind of power

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/498133-graham-on-potential-supreme-court-vacancy-this-would-be-a-different?amp

[jimfields33]

3. The founders were brilliant in not giving one part of government too much power

House is where bills start especially funding, senate deals with judicial and presidential appointments and president manages everything (or supposed to).

[SBoy]

4. It's the Senate rules they've written for themselves

That allowed the Senate Majority Leader to become the most powerful person in the Country, second only to the President.

[rurallib]

5. My understanding is that back in the early days the Senate was chosen

by forms other than being elected by a direct vote. Mostly they were chosen by state legislatures. Often that meant they were selected by a committee or a powerful individual and then passed on in a show vote. I believe the choice by state legislature was in the constitution.

That changed somewhere in the progressive era fully 100+ years ago.

From the beginning the House has been elected by popular vote. The leader of the House - the speaker - is elected by a majority of members who were elected by popular vote. Thus the Speaker at that time was the closest - next to the president/ VP - to be chosen by popular vote.

[Under The Radar]

6. In the Federalists Papers James Madison wrote...

“There is no fucking way we can allow a power grubbing turtle to obtain the ultimate seat of power in the executive branch.”

[erronis]

11. Excellent! I knew I had seen that quote somewhere before - thanks!

[Totally Tunsie]

18. Can you provide a link to this specific quote, please?

Otherwise, I'll presume you're joking and left off the thingie.

All-knowing Google doesn't seem to recognize the quote, nor does Snopes.

[Under The Radar]

20. Really? You need a sarcasm sign?

Do you think that Madison could know that the senate majority leader of a party that be founded for another 80 years would be so power hungry and deviously to circumvent the rules and laws of government that Alex Hamilton and himself had feverishly labored over, and that this futuristic authoritarian would also happen to look like a turtle...all of this 232 years before?
Here ya go.

[Totally Tunsie]

21. It was exactly my DISBELIEF that led me to question your "quote".

Were you so oblivious you did not pick up on that? Pot, meet kettle.

You could have saved the bandwidth with your useless "quote" which was neither humorous nor informative.

Nice try. Don't chastise me for your failed attempt to be funny. Leave the jokes to a real comedian.

[Under The Radar]

22. All that and for some reason you felt a need to respond?

[sop]

7. It seems when Republicans are in charge of either the Senate or the House, they have more power

than when in Democratic hands. The presidency too, and pretty much every other federal agency as well. I just can't figure it out...must be some clause in the Constitution.

[erronis]

12. Maybe because Democrats try to listen to all sides and (r)epuglicons only listen to their wallets?

Not that Democrats don't like some extra funding.

Just that (r)epuglicons will do anything legal/illegal, ethical/unethical, moral/immoral to gain money and power. Even selling out their country.

[sop]

14. I think it's because Democrats believe democracy is not just about winning, or a quest for raw

power, rather it's a desire and willingness to share power, distribute it equally among all the people and create a more humane society. Unfortunately, Democrats will always be at a disadvantage when dealing with modern-day Republicans.

[dawg]

15. In the past, Democrats have felt contrained by political norms and ...

an overall sense of fairness and decency.

Republicans don't care about any of that and are happy to obstruct, hold the nation hostage, and win on technicalities. They are all like George Costanza screaming "Moops!" at the bubble boy.

[Yavin4]

17. Because the Republican agenda is simple: cut taxes for the rich and block everything else.

You're going to be more powerful if that's all you do. Democrats have a huge agenda, climate change, healthcare, income inequality, education, criminal justice, etc.

[procon]

10. The members of the House are elected by popular vote

To represent the people of the United States. They are supposedly closest to serving the will of the people. The Speaker is first and foremost among them, the chief representative of the people.

[erronis]

13. Agree. And most of the comments above this one seem to, also.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. The Senate is designed to slow down the House and President

It doesn't represent the people; it represents the states (remember, it was originally appointed by states, not voters). The Senate has "power" in the sense of being able to block a lot of things - appointments, laws, treaties.

[FakeNoose]

19. Here's what I learned in high school civics class (50 years ago)

The elected Vice President of the country (2nd in line to succeed the President) is also the President of the Senate.

The Speaker of the House (3rd in line to succeed the President) is the majority party leader of the House of Representatives.

If the President should die or be incapacitated, he would be immediately replaced by the Vice President. The New POTUS then appoints someone to replace him as Vice President (and President of the Senate). The new designated-VP must be approved by both the House and the Senate.

Once that happens, the new Vice President steps in 2nd in line to succeed the President. Therefore the Speaker of the House would only become President if both POTUS and VP should die or be incapacitated at the same time. What are the chances of that happening, other than on a fantasy TV show? Rather slim, I'd say.

[Trumpocalypse]

23. The VP is President of the Senate

according to the the constitution. So the succession is President of the Senate then the Speaker of the House.

[pecosbob]

24. In theory the Senate is no more powerful than the House

Flip majorities in the bodies and it would be the same in reverse.