What do you think of Lt. Governor being elected separately from the Governors?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'd rather have the position just abolished in Minnesota, where it is useless. If the Lt. Gov. actually has some power though, I'd agree with having them separately elected. The worst system is how Illinois has it but will soon abolish it, where they run separately in the primary but run as a ticket in the general for fairly obvious reasons and why Illinois abolished it.

I was thinking that simply letting the second place in the primary run as the Lt. Gov. but then I realized in cases where an incumbent Governor is running basically unopposed you'd like end up with cases where some LaRouchite or other assorted nutcases end up on the ticket.

Here's an idea. You get two votes, and the gubernatorial candidate is selected by IRV, and then his running mate is selected by IRV from the remaining candidates.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Haha, maybe the runner up in the general election should be the LG, like in the old days when that's how VP's were selected.

For about two or three prez elections and then we realized that was a really dumb system.  Despite *gasp* it being conceived by our almighty genius founding fathers.

The Vice Presidency was in many ways a afterthought.  To enhance separation of powers, they wanted the Legislature to have a minimal influence in choosing the executive, which is why we have an electoral College instead of having the Congress elect the President, which would have mirrored the practice used in eight of the thirteen original States at the time of the drafting of the Constitution. (New York and New England had direct election of the executive, the rest had the legislature elect him.)

Also, they didn't conceive of political parties arising.

[Meeker]

I don't really care so long as it's not a system where they force the two to run on a ticket after running separately in the primary.

Xahar's idea isn't bad. Nor is the idea of giving the Lt. Governor the role most Secretaries of State have/making the Secretary of State second in line.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Either elect it separately or abolish it. If the Lt. Governor is pointless enough that not electing him/her separately seriously seems like a good idea, you know you shouldn't have one in the first place.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The last time a LG took over was when Ridge left to become Fatherland Security Secretary..... we had a wonderful LG.....shame he didn't want to run for a whole term.

Ah, yes my last PA Governor. A shame indeed.


What about Indiana? Didn't they have a Governor die midterm a few years back?

[JohnnyLongtorso]

The last time a LG took over was when Ridge left to become Fatherland Security Secretary..... we had a wonderful LG.....shame he didn't want to run for a whole term.

Ah, yes my last PA Governor. A shame indeed.


What about Indiana? Didn't they have a Governor die midterm a few years back?

Frank O'Bannon. His LG, Joe Kernan, served for about a year and a half, and lost to Mitch Daniels in 2004.

[muon2]

I'd rather have the position just abolished in Minnesota, where it is useless. If the Lt. Gov. actually has some power though, I'd agree with having them separately elected. The worst system is how Illinois has it but will soon abolish it, where they run separately in the primary but run as a ticket in the general for fairly obvious reasons and why Illinois abolished it.

I was thinking that simply letting the second place in the primary run as the Lt. Gov. but then I realized in cases where an incumbent Governor is running basically unopposed you'd like end up with cases where some LaRouchite or other assorted nutcases end up on the ticket.

Illinois provided for separate primaries but single Nov ticket for Gov and LG in the 1970 constitution. It hasn't worked out very well. Back in 1986, followers of LaRouche won the Dem primaries for LG and AG based on their innocuous last names (Fairchild and Hart vs. Sangmeister and Pucinski). Their nomination caused Gov nominee Stevenson to leave the ticket and run as an independent under the Solidarity Party.

Then this year the LG nominations went to two young inexperienced candidates with plenty of money to spend on advertising. Fundraising is nearly impossible for LG candidates, so a self-funder has a huge advantage, when there is no well recognized name on the ballot. As we now know the major media only found out about the Dem nominee's history after the primary, and he was subsequently pushed from the ballot.

The IL constitution gives the legislature the power to enact a law causing the Gov and LG to run as a ticket in the primary. No law was enacted after the '86 primary, but this year a bill has been sent to the Gov to combine the ticket from the outset.

[Torie]

Hey Muon2, off topic, but did Illinois pass any kind of public employee pension reform?

[muon2]

Hey Muon2, off topic, but did Illinois pass any kind of public employee pension reform?

Yes. All public employees hired on or after Jan 1, 2011 will have a reduced set of benefits. The salary applicable for the pension is capped at $106,800 in 2011 and will increase annually at the lesser of 3% or 1/2 the CPI. The current salary used for computation has no cap. The minimum age for the benefit is increased to 67 for the new benefit or 62 for a reduced benefit. That is an increase from the current minimum age of 55 for most current public employees.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I'd rather have the position just abolished in Minnesota, where it is useless. If the Lt. Gov. actually has some power though, I'd agree with having them separately elected. The worst system is how Illinois has it but will soon abolish it, where they run separately in the primary but run as a ticket in the general for fairly obvious reasons and why Illinois abolished it.

I was thinking that simply letting the second place in the primary run as the Lt. Gov. but then I realized in cases where an incumbent Governor is running basically unopposed you'd like end up with cases where some LaRouchite or other assorted nutcases end up on the ticket.

Illinois provided for separate primaries but single Nov ticket for Gov and LG in the 1970 constitution. It hasn't worked out very well. Back in 1986, followers of LaRouche won the Dem primaries for LG and AG based on their innocuous last names (Fairchild and Hart vs. Sangmeister and Pucinski). Their nomination caused Gov nominee Stevenson to leave the ticket and run as an independent under the Solidarity Party.

Then this year the LG nominations went to two young inexperienced candidates with plenty of money to spend on advertising. Fundraising is nearly impossible for LG candidates, so a self-funder has a huge advantage, when there is no well recognized name on the ballot. As we now know the major media only found out about the Dem nominee's history after the primary, and he was subsequently pushed from the ballot.

The IL constitution gives the legislature the power to enact a law causing the Gov and LG to run as a ticket in the primary. No law was enacted after the '86 primary, but this year a bill has been sent to the Gov to combine the ticket from the outset.

Which method of electing LG's do you prefer, muon2?  Did you support the legislation sent to the Governor whether it was, or even if it wasn't your preferred outcome?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The last time a LG took over was when Ridge left to become Fatherland Security Secretary..... we had a wonderful LG.....shame he didn't want to run for a whole term.

Ah, yes my last PA Governor. A shame indeed.

I really think he would have beaten Rendell........he had a lot of good will going for him especially after his response to the mine disaster.

Ha, Obama and Dubya could have learned a lesson on managing a tragedy from Schweiker come to think of it.

[Torie]

Hey Muon2, off topic, but did Illinois pass any kind of public employee pension reform?

Yes. All public employees hired on or after Jan 1, 2011 will have a reduced set of benefits. The salary applicable for the pension is capped at $106,800 in 2011 and will increase annually at the lesser of 3% or 1/2 the CPI. The current salary used for computation has no cap. The minimum age for the benefit is increased to 67 for the new benefit or 62 for a reduced benefit. That is an increase from the current minimum age of 55 for most current public employees.

Those are pretty major changes Muon2. Well done!  Now the next step is to phase out defined benefit plans. And I know just the man to do it.

[muon2]

I'd rather have the position just abolished in Minnesota, where it is useless. If the Lt. Gov. actually has some power though, I'd agree with having them separately elected. The worst system is how Illinois has it but will soon abolish it, where they run separately in the primary but run as a ticket in the general for fairly obvious reasons and why Illinois abolished it.

I was thinking that simply letting the second place in the primary run as the Lt. Gov. but then I realized in cases where an incumbent Governor is running basically unopposed you'd like end up with cases where some LaRouchite or other assorted nutcases end up on the ticket.

Illinois provided for separate primaries but single Nov ticket for Gov and LG in the 1970 constitution. It hasn't worked out very well. Back in 1986, followers of LaRouche won the Dem primaries for LG and AG based on their innocuous last names (Fairchild and Hart vs. Sangmeister and Pucinski). Their nomination caused Gov nominee Stevenson to leave the ticket and run as an independent under the Solidarity Party.

Then this year the LG nominations went to two young inexperienced candidates with plenty of money to spend on advertising. Fundraising is nearly impossible for LG candidates, so a self-funder has a huge advantage, when there is no well recognized name on the ballot. As we now know the major media only found out about the Dem nominee's history after the primary, and he was subsequently pushed from the ballot.

The IL constitution gives the legislature the power to enact a law causing the Gov and LG to run as a ticket in the primary. No law was enacted after the '86 primary, but this year a bill has been sent to the Gov to combine the ticket from the outset.

Which method of electing LG's do you prefer, muon2?  Did you support the legislation sent to the Governor whether it was, or even if it wasn't your preferred outcome?

I've never understood separate election of the LG. That's especially true in a state like IL where the LG has no constitutional duties, except to replace the Gov in that rare event. I remain puzzled that nothing was done in all the years after '86. It took Cohen on the heels of Blago to get it done.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I've never understood separate election of the LG. That's especially true in a state like IL where the LG has no constitutional duties, except to replace the Gov in that rare event. I remain puzzled that nothing was done in all the years after '86. It took Cohen on the heels of Blago to get it done.

Can't speak to the history of the office in Illinois or any other States, but in South Carolina, both offices were originally elected by the General Assembly, so there was no need for a ticket.  Incidentally, our LG does have some mild legislative duties.  He presides over the Senate and can break ties there.