Post your 2016 VP candidate predictions here

Quote: Pacomartin

What I am saying is that someone will sue and charge that the candidate is violating the "spirit and intent" of the amendment. While they may not win, the publicity may taint the election badly.

Don't you know the Wizard well enough by now to see he'd welcome this as a way to settle a perceived ambiguity?

I'd bet he'd like to see Bill as VP, W. Bush as Speaker of the House, Obama as president pro-tem of the Senate and Jimmy Carter as Secretary of State.

Quote: Nareed

Don't you know the Wizard well enough by now to see he'd welcome this as a way to settle a perceived ambiguity?

True, True!

The following professor says that the "spirit" of the amendment is a weak argument especially to fans of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Quote: Michael C. Dorf: The spirit of the 22nd Amendment (August 2, 2000)

Nonetheless, it could be argued that permitting Clinton to run for, and be elected to the office of, vice president violates the spirit if not the letter of the 22nd Amendment.

The argument is a weak one, however. The 22nd Amendment was adopted in part simply to formalize the tradition unbroken until FDR that American presidents should not seek a third term.

It was also a reaction to the growth in the power of the president in the 20th Century. But in seeking the vice-presidency, a job in John Nance Garner's unforgettable phrase, "not worth a bucket of warm spit," Clinton would hardly be bidding for dictatorial powers.

Furthermore, Republicans trying to fend off the winning Gore-Clinton team lack moral standing to invoke the spirit of any constitutional provision, in preference to its plain language.

George W. Bush proudly calls himself a "strict constructionist" who hews to the letter of the Constitution. And the exegesis of the 22nd Amendment that I have provided here is exactly the sort of "textualism" that Bush's judicial heroes Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas routinely applaud.

Of course, even if Gore were to offer him the number two spot, Clinton might turn it down. That would be a mistake for Clinton and for the country. He thrives on campaigns and we, as a people, thrive on him.

Michael C. Dorf is vice dean and professor of law at Columbia University, where he teaches civil procedure and constitutional law.

Quote: Pacomartin

True, True!

I suppose Lyndon Johnson could have run for reelection by the terms of the 22nd amendment, but he chose not to.

On his farewell address, Reagan urged Congress to repeal the amendment, and got a cheer from the audience. But I doubt he seriously wanted a third term. He was nearing 80 by then.

I recall Bill Clinton mentioning in an interview that there was discussion and general consensus amongst the living former presidents at the time that the term should be extended to six years in order to allow more time to actually get things done instead of campaigning.

Quote: Ayecarumba

I recall Bill Clinton mentioning in an interview that there was discussion and general consensus amongst the living former presidents at the time that the term should be extended to six years in order to allow more time to actually get things done instead of campaigning.

I'd favor reducing campaigns instead. Why not have six weeks of campaigning during, say, between January and March of the election year (2016 in this case) and hold all the primaries, caucuses and state party conventions within the following two weeks. Then the national conventions as each party wants, and then the election in the first Tuesday following the first Monday in November?

Of course, any party or person could campaign earlier. So then the government would fine the parties a nominal amount, say $1,000,000(*) for every day of active campaigning before the official season. If a person doesn't campaign for any given party, then the fine would be assessed to the party they try to get the nomination for.

The wrinkle is that parties are, as a matter of the letter of the law, not part of government. Therefore their free speech, never mind that of private citizens running for president, cannot be constrained. An agreement between parties to reduce campaigns would, of necessity, be worth as much as a politician's word (ie, not a rusty penny).

But extending the presidency to six years would net you eventually, correspondingly longer campaigns.

A six-year presidential term with a restriction to only one term, though, would be worth thinking about. The problem is that a disaster of a presidency would drag on for 6 long years. Imagine Carter for 6 years instead of 4.

Every silver lining has a cloud. Don't ever forget it.


(*) fines need to have teeth if they are to work. $1 million per day is not an expense which can be easily sustained.

Quote: Nareed

I suppose Lyndon Johnson could have run for reelection by the terms of the 22nd amendment, but he chose not to.

Johnson served only 425 days of J. F. Kennedy's term, so he remained eligible. If the time had been over 2 years, he would not have been eligible. Initially he was expecting to run and was in a single primary.

March 12, 1968 McCarthy won 42% of the primary vote to Johnson's 49% in New Hampshire
March 16, 1968 Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York, renounced his earlier support for Johnson and proclaimed his candidacy.
March 31, 1968, the President ended a televised address regarding the War by announcing he would not seek re-election.
April 2, 1968 McCarthy wins Wisconsin primary
April 23, 1968 McCarthy wins Pennsylvania primary
April 27, 1968, Vice President Humphrey announced he is entering the race, but does not register for remaining primaries

Johnson believed he could secure his place in the history books by ending the war before the election in November, thus giving Humphrey the boost he would need to win. There were only 13 Democratic primaries in 1968 and three involve only a single candidate.

1 Lyndon B. Johnson (New Hampshire initial primary)
1 Stephen M. Young (home state of Florida beating only McCarthy)
1 George Smathers (home state of Ohio unopposed)
4 Robert Kennedy (Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and California) assassinated on June 6, 1968
6 Eugene McCarthy(Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Oregon, New Jersey, and Illinois)
0 Hubert Humphrey

Out of protest to Hubert Humphrey being nominated without entering a single primary, in 1972 primaries or caucuses were held in all the states, but Democratic losses in 1972 and 1980 soured the party to relying totally on primaries. By 1984 the Democratic party superdelegates were reinstated so that the candidate would not be totally elected by the masses.