Selecting Vice-Presidential Nominees

[LastMcGovernite]

It is curious to note how, over the past 60 years, while the presidential nomination became a more democratic process, the vice-presidential selection became more dictatorial. Prior to 1940 or so, both the top and the bottom of the ticket were chosen by convention delegates, often hand-picked by governors or party bosses.  Thus, choosing both the President and Veep nominees became the province of painstaking compromise, political intrigue, and smoke-filled rooms.  The primary system did much to keep this to a minimum, particularly after the McGovern Commission ruled for more extensive and numerous primaries, and racial, gender, and age balance among the delegates.   

Yet, as primaries became more and more determinant, a converse process happened with the Vice-President.  Slowly, conventions merely deferred to the candidate's wishes.  The choice of running-mate became the perogative the candidate himself (although, no doubt, informed by consultation with party leaders, considerations of geographic and ideological balance, and information culled from a vetting process).  The first case I can think of is in 1940, when FDR insisted on having Henry A. Wallace onboard as the Veep, while Adlai Stevenson's 1956 decision to let the convention choose his running-mate was the last time a candidate didn't chose for himself.

So, while presidential candidates have to mingle, and press the flesh, in the dullest Iowa farm towns, the snowiest Main Streets in New Hampshire, and the sweltering shantytowns of South Carolina, Veeps, not having proven their mettle, are simply awarded a berth on the ticket.  Granted, some candidates chose primary opponents- Kerry chose Edwards, Obama chose Biden, and Reagan chose Bush, after all.  But most do not- witness Bush choosing Quayle, McCain opting for Palin, Carter selecting Mondale, Mondale picking Ferraro, Gore annointing Lieberman, McGovern picking Eagleton and Shriver (although after Muskie, Humphrey, and everybody else he ran against turned him down) etc.


The question I'd like to put under consideration is this: is this process insufficiently democratic?  Should an alternative- say, Vice-Presidential primaries, or rewarding the Vice-Presidential slot to whomever places second in convention voting, be considered?  Or should candidates choose Vice-Presidents during primary season itself, so voters know exactly what they are getting? 

Or, does the president, who must chose a cabinet, supereme court judges, etc., have the proper perogative to select his immediate successor, with a token convention vote ratifying his decision?

[LastMcGovernite]

Sorry- this probably should have gone under the Electoral Reform board.  Mea culpa

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

A Vice-Presidential primary concurrent with a Presidential one would be interesting...

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

A Vice-Presidential primary concurrent with a Presidential one would be interesting...

IIRC, New Hampshire holds a non-binding Vice-Presidential primary in conjunction with the Presidential primary.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I also feel that, in the age of potential catastrophe, the succession list should include a few governors out of DC.

Including governors would be technically possible with a change of the law, but you then have the problem of how do you decide which governor gets first shot at being President.  It also would be difficult to transfer effective control in the sort of emergency that would necessitate it.

[pragmatic liberal]

I think that having the president pick a vice-presidential candidate is probably, on balance, a good thing. The powers and duties of the vice-presidency have increased and it makes sense that the vice president be someone the president can trust and work with. That's likelier if the choice is made by the presidential candidate than by others.

I actually think we could do without the vice presidency. If the president needs a deputy or second-in-command then make a separate, appointed, executive officer. Call him or her the "Assistant President" or "First Secretary" or "Chancellor," and have them go through Senate confirmation. That way you get someone who is more likely to be a truly valuable deputy. By making the vice president part of the election process you simply introduce all kinds of electoral considerations that really shouldn't be relevant if you want someone to simply be an able deputy.

And if the president dies, resigns or is removed from office, the office can devolve to the First Secretary on an interim basis and then you could call a special election (so long as there's more than a year left in the term).

There are a couple old articles from The Atlantic that advocate abolishing the vice presidency and instituting a special election requirement. One is by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., from 1974, and the other is from 1947. Schlesinger advocates a general election to be held within 3-6 months for the remainder of the presidential term, while Wilmerding (the author of the 1947 piece) argues for simply holding an election for a full 4-year term in concurrence with the next congressional election. So, for example, there would have been a presidential election in 1974.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

> http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/pres/wilmer.htm - The 1947 article
> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/197405/schlesinger-vice-presidency - Schlesinger's 1947 article.

[jimrtex]

A Vice-Presidential primary concurrent with a Presidential one would be interesting...

IIRC, New Hampshire holds a non-binding Vice-Presidential primary in conjunction with the Presidential primary.

Though I think they decided to get rid of it.

[J. J.]

I worry about continuity of government issues and really want a vice president.

[Хahar 🤔]

I worry about continuity of government issues and really want a vice president.

We have one.

[ChrisJG777]

Including governors would be technically possible with a change of the law, but you then have the problem of how do you decide which governor gets first shot at being President.

I suppose using the order in which the states were admitted to the union is out of the question?

[gregusodenus]

Including governors would be technically possible with a change of the law, but you then have the problem of how do you decide which governor gets first shot at being President.

I suppose using the order in which the states were admitted to the union is out of the question?

There are governors who are ineligible for the Presidency, namely the governator.

[ChrisJG777]

Including governors would be technically possible with a change of the law, but you then have the problem of how do you decide which governor gets first shot at being President.

I suppose using the order in which the states were admitted to the union is out of the question?

There are governors who are ineligible for the Presidency, namely the governator.

In which case it shouldn't be too much hassle to skip them, afterall cabinet members who're ineligible to become president are missed out of the line of succession.

[gregusodenus]

Including governors would be technically possible with a change of the law, but you then have the problem of how do you decide which governor gets first shot at being President.

I suppose using the order in which the states were admitted to the union is out of the question?

There are governors who are ineligible for the Presidency, namely the governator.

In which case it shouldn't be too much hassle to skip them, afterall cabinet members who're ineligible to become president are missed out of the line of succession.

I thought cabinet members have to be eligible for the Presidency to hold their position.

[ChrisJG777]

Including governors would be technically possible with a change of the law, but you then have the problem of how do you decide which governor gets first shot at being President.

I suppose using the order in which the states were admitted to the union is out of the question?

There are governors who are ineligible for the Presidency, namely the governator.

In which case it shouldn't be too much hassle to skip them, afterall cabinet members who're ineligible to become president are missed out of the line of succession.

I thought cabinet members have to be eligible for the Presidency to hold their position.

Bush's Secretary of Labor (and Mitch McConnell's wife), Elaine Chao, born in Taiwan, ineligible to become President and full cabinet member, she was simply skipped from the line of succession.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Bush's Secretary of Labor (and Mitch McConnell's wife), Elaine Chao, born in Taiwan, ineligible to become President and full cabinet member, she was simply skipped from the line of succession.

Don't forget Kissinger.