Rethinking the Veepstakes

Comment

By John Nichols

This article appeared in the August 18, 2008 edition of The Nation.

July 30, 2008

Barack Obama and John McCain are preparing to engage in one of the uglier perversions of America's democratic promise. With the breathless encouragement of media and political elites, the men who would be President are about to choose running mates who, after perfunctory ratification by the Democratic and Republican conventions, could well define the character of the two parties, the politics of the country and the presidency for many years. For all the high-minded talk about selecting the best and brightest, the VP nominees will be chosen with the same purpose Barry Goldwater acknowledged in 1964: "to get more votes." While the next Vice President is to be selected by an individual, and nominated and elected as an afterthought, he or she will become what Gouverneur Morris, one of the wisest of our framers, feared: an American variant of the royal heir apparent.

Of forty-three Presidents so far, nine were Vice Presidents who assumed the position when the chief executive either died or quit. Four sitting Vice Presidents were elected to the top job, as was a former Vice President. And in the past fifty years, nine of twelve national elections have featured at least one presidential nominee who was previously nominated for Vice President.

Almost as consequential is the evolution of the office. Gone are the days when, as Harry Truman said, the Veep's job was to "go to weddings and funerals." Dick Cheney was minding the store while George W. Bush read children's books on September 11, 2001. And Cheney's prince regent presidency is merely an extreme variation on an expanding position; don't forget that Al Gore "reinvented government." Is it wise to cede the authority to pick perhaps the next party nominee, and perhaps the next President, to a candidate who seeks merely--or even primarily--to "get more votes," especially in light of less-than-stellar recent selections like Dan Quayle, Joe Lieberman and Cheney?

Subscriber Login

4 ISSUES FREE

Subscribe Now!

The only way to read this article and the full contents of each week's issue of The Nation online is by subscribing to the magazine. Subscribe now and read this article -- and every article published since for the past five years -- right now.

There's no obligation -- try The Nation for four weeks free.

.

About John Nichols

John Nichols, a pioneering political blogger, has written The Beat since 1999. His posts have been circulated internationally, quoted in numerous books and mentioned in debates on the floor of Congress.

Nichols writes about politics for The Nation magazine as its Washington correspondent. He is a contributing writer for The Progressive and In These Times and the associate editor of the Capital Times, the daily newspaper in Madison, Wisconsin. His articles have appeared in the New York Times, Chicago Tribune and dozens of other newspapers.

more...
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

Bill Moyers Tells a Tale of Two Quagmires: Vietnam & Afghanistan | "Once again, the loudest case for enlarging the war is being made by those who will not have to fight it..."
John Nichols
29 Comments
Posted at 9:34 ET

» The Notion

Palin as the Church Lady | Going Rogue book tour brings passive-aggressive rightwing Christianity to the fore.
Leslie Savan
81 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | The "Second Amendment" sale; the raving paranoids of the right.
Eric Alterman

» Editor's Cut

An Alternative to Escalation in Afghanistan | President Obama is expected to make a decision regarding his Afghanistan strategy after Thanksgiving.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
69 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

Chongqing: Socialism in One City | China is managing the most important event in the world: the urbanization of half a billion people. Fast.
Robert Dreyfuss
204 Comments

» Act Now!

Toward Copenhagen | A guide to joining the movement against climate change.
Peter Rothberg
61 Comments