Vice President powerful in US Senate

As I understand it the Constitution makes the VP President of the Senate. In OTL the only significance of this seems to be where there is a tie, which in most normal circumstances gives a victory to the administration.

Is it possible that a VP could have had real influence in the Senate. This could either be the ways the office has been interpreted or particular individuals. For instance had JFK taken LBJ more seriously might Johnson have been de facto majority leader in the Senate from Jan 1962 to November 1963.

Obviously traditions might have developed in the 1790s. That is why it is in this forum, however imaginably it could relate to post 1900 or even future history.
 
Originally John Adams used to interfere in Senate Debate and after the first session the Senate severally limited VP power essentially taking a strict constructionist take on the VP office.

we have two options
1. make John Adams less of an obnixous know it all. I think that is impossible or if we do than we make Adams not Adams and as such don't guarantee him a place in the Washington's cabinet

2. Adams is not first VP. John Jay IIRC finished second he was much more of a deal maker and less abrasive he may get us were we need to be.

The butterflies from this would be huge. from about 1820s to the start of the ACW in 1861 the Senate was the battle ground for slavery. All of sudden sectional balance is hugely important and has potential ramifications that are astounding. Imagine if John Calhoun or Martin Van Buren or George Clinton could inject themselves in Senate debate and not just watch.
 
As I understand it the Constitution makes the VP President of the Senate. In OTL the only significance of this seems to be where there is a tie, which in most normal circumstances gives a victory to the administration.

Is it possible that a VP could have had real influence in the Senate. This could either be the ways the office has been interpreted or particular individuals. For instance had JFK taken LBJ more seriously might Johnson have been de facto majority leader in the Senate from Jan 1961 to November 1963.

Obviously traditions might have developed in the 1790s. That is why it is in this forum, however imaginably it could relate to post 1900 or even future history.

GSM beat me to the point I was going to make about John Adams. This would indeed create some interesting butterflies. Especially if, as part of the minority party, the VP could block the legislative agenda of the majority. I imagine that there would be an earlier move to amend the Constitution to provide for filling vacancies in the office of VP if the office were more powerful/important.
 
Last edited:
Top