Whether the Nobel Committee represents the government of Norway is key to understanding whether the Prize's $1.4 million cash award is an ˜emolument' from a "King, Prince or foreign State and is thus prohibited by the Constitution. Rotunda and Pham believe it is. If it were, then Obama probably would have to obtain the consent of Congress before accepting the Prize. He would also be obliged to turn the cash award over to the Treasury.
While Obama has pledged to give the prize money to charity, Rotunda and Pham point out that the gift would still leave him with a sizeable personal income tax deduction. That would never do if the money were sourced to a "King, Prince, or foreign State.
Rotunda and Pham also point out that although other sitting presidents (T. Roosevelt and Wilson) have received the Nobel Peace Prize (thus establishing the precedents for Obama to accept it, it would seem), those Prizes recognized past accomplishments. Obama's Prize, they say, is intended to influence his future actions.
To test the validity of this assertion, I ask myself, "If the president were incapacitated and unable to serve the rest of his term, would he still be worthy of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize? I believe the answer is, "Yes : he still would be worthy of the Prize even if only his record of advocacy for peace since he announced his candidacy were considered.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
