Under the Constitution, the Vice President is granted two powers: 1.) to vote in the Senate in the event that the other Senators are tied, and 2.) to certify the electoral college votes. That is the extent of the VP's power. Any additional assignments and duties are informal. VP candidate Sarah Palin mentioned in Thursday's debate that she, like Dick Cheney, believes that the Constitution is open for interpretation in outlining the Vice-President's power. Both believe the Vice-President is part of the legislative branch of the U.S. government.
The basis for this arguement is that one sentence in Article I, the article granting legislative powers, state's that the VP shall preside over the Senate. But, under the sections relating to the Senate and House, it is expressly stated that these members are ELECTED by the people in their respected consituencies. Clearly, the Palin-Cheney view is untrue, and any attempt to give legislative power to an UNELECTED official who is aligned with the Executive branch undermines the very system of checks and balances that our government is founded upon and has kept us free from the tyranny of dictatorship or monarchy.
Over the last 8 years, we have witnessed the devastation that a consolidation of Executive Power can cause. President Bush has increased the power of Executive Order, and Dick Cheney has expanded the role of Vice-President to a level unimaginable prior to 2000. Recently, Cheney has claimed that he is immune from the scope of the Presidential Records Act because he is part of the legislative branch. This is absurd, and I fear is the reason McCain-Palin follows the Cheney view of VP power. Both plan to use this loophole (litigation pending against Cheney) to destroy key documents that would give the public some insight into the innerworkings of the Bush administration's foreign policy making. This abuse of power must stop, and the people must be allowed to have oversight of the government in order to restore trust in our elected officials.
(Certainly not for lack of interest.)
Wednesday afternoon. Well, I suppose that would make today like Christmas. Only Santa never showed up. Wow. What a shocker. Not even an update on Obama's schedule for announcing his choice for a running mate. What happened?
Despite the fact that it is entirely too early to be worrying about such things, a lot of people have been speculating lately on who will choose whom for vice president. The VP topic is only slightly better than all the polling and horse race nonsense, but I’ve seen enough discussion on it lately to devote this blog post to the subject.
My hope is that people will take heed of what I am saying and either completely stop talking about this stuff on this site or at least help to set others straight when they start venturing down this path (whether here or in other forums).
Some Hillary supporters are advocating a Clinton/Obama ticket. Even some Obama supporters are advocating an Obama/Clinton ticket. Either eventuality is complete and utter nonsense and I’m going to give you the reasons why.
(1) The first and most important is that Obama will be the nominee, so no one will actually need to worry who Clinton would select as a running mate. The fact that Obama will win the nomination has not yet dawned on some people, which helps to fuel the speculation and means I have to present reasons two through four below.
(2) There is no way Hillary would pick someone who will outshine her on the campaign trail and remind everyone of her shortcomings. Talk about voter's remorse! Can you imagine the anxiety and dread that would ensue if, every single day of the general election campaign, the electorate was reminded that the best candidate in the race did not win the nomination? What about an Obama appearance drawing more people than the main candidate? No way. It would be Bayh or Vilsack or Wes Clark or someone like that, i.e. someone who would owe the Clintons and is in no position to overshadow Hillary or have an independent national power base. While Hillary would love to have the enthusiasm and grassroots organization of the Obama campaign, she would not be able to stomach Obama because he owes her nothing and is already a power player who does not need anyone named Clinton to advance himself.
(3) There is no way Hillary could go through the entire primary season saying Barack was too inexperienced and naïve and then turn around and say that, actually, you know what? Never mind all that, he actually is ready to be "a heartbeat away." Plus, if Hillary's strategy of painting him as inexperienced actually ends up working in the primaries, the Republicans will use it too, in addition to the full frontal assault they are longing to unleash on HRC. They will be able to hammer away on so many fronts it will make your head spin. They would be able to attack her judgment (how can she pick someone so naïve and irresponsible?), attack her flip-flops (how can she say Obama isn’t ready, then pick him as a running mate?) and, since the Republican candidate will not be named Clinton or Bush, the GOP candidate would have a much easier time arguing that he is the candidate of change. All of that is before they start dredging up past scandals, such as Whitewater, the travel office firings, the improbable commodities investment prowess, the FBI files mysteriously appearing, the Rose law firm billing records, the Peter F. Paul campaign finance felony case, etc. etc. etc.
(4a) Even if asked, if Barack wants to maintain his untainted image and be the champion of a different kind of politics, he would be wise to steer clear of any direct involvement with the Clintons. I strongly suspect that he is fully aware of this and would say no even if asked, but, as noted in (1), (2) and (3) above, I don’t see it even getting to this point.
(4b) The corollary is that, once Barack has the nomination in hand, he will not select Hillary as his running mate for all of the reasons that he has been talking about during this campaign. She does not represent the kind of change we need and her politics and image are divisive and will not allow us to achieve the progress we so desperately need. If you believe Barack when he talks about these things (and you should because he tells the truth), you cannot honestly say that Hillary would be a good choice for the VP spot.
The fact that there are a lot of Clinton supporters saying both that Barack is too inexperienced, but also that he would be a great VP choice for Hillary helps to illustrate how little thought they are putting into their choice of candidate. It also illustrates that, at some level, they recognize that Barack has considerable appeal to a broad swath of the electorate -- appeal they long to have on their ticket. They know that this sort of appeal will not magically appear for Hillary, so they like to think they can easily remedy that shortcoming by slapping Barack’s name in the VP slot, even though they have not thought things through enough to realize that their candidate would never ever actually select Barack. This should give Obama supporters some hope since this means such Clinton supporters already like Barack, they just need to be convinced that he really and truly is ready right now and should not have to wait in line behind Hillary. That is a much easier sell than trying to paint Hillary as unelectable or get into detailed debates about policy.
From a Clinton campaign perspective, obviously, they must know that Barack is the biggest threat to her winning the nomination. He’s a better candidate and they can’t win on substance, so how do they attack this problem? They certainly don’t do it by debating on the substance of the policy issues or character and integrity. They need a non-specific reason to convince undecided people to not vote for him and to keep their supporters in line. Thus, they say that Barack needs more experience to help get him out of their way and, in conjunction with that, do the triangulation thing to try to blur the distinctions, with the goal being to help make voters think that there is no really big difference other than experience, which Barack allegedly lacks. As an added bonus, this approach does not involve a series of nasty attacks that would alienate too many of Barack’s supporters or, more importantly, turn off the black community. As polarizing as Hillary is and as motivated as the GOP would be to run against her, she would be in real trouble if black voters stayed home or did not vote overwhelmingly Democratic.
Not having enough experience is the one and only thing that would not be able to be remedied in time for the general election. Policy positions can be changed if necessary, money can be raised, advertising can help send targeted messages to ameliorate any deficiencies, debate performances can be spun, but if Joe and Jane Undecided can be persuaded that Barack needs to be a governor first or spend more time in the Senate, they will look past the huge advantages he holds in every substantive area and stick with the nostalgia for the 90's and comfort themselves that a woman will bring the change we need. Furthermore, changing the conversation to “who will be Hillary’s VP choice” feeds into the inevitability fallacy that the Clintonistas are trying to propagate.
So, good people of the Obama movement, I implore you -- Should it become necessary for you to express an opinion on a hypothetical Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket, please use anything I’ve written and anything else you know to shoot holes in the argument as expediently as possible and then move on to discussing why Barack is ready right this very minute to be the President and the fact that President Obama’s administration will get this nation of ours back on the right path both domestically and in foreign policy. Our time is much better spent supporting Barack and taking action to get him elected rather than distracting ourselves with whether or not Hillary’s lead is growing or shrinking or who will be the VP choice. In fact, I apologize for distracting you by delving into this subject, but I felt a strong need to try to clear the air. Now, let's go change the world!!!
Can you imagine if Al Gore were humble enough to accept the nod for Veep again on an Obama/Gore ticket? There's nothing in the Constitution prohibiting it, right? Unlikely story, but it would be an unstoppable ticket.It can't be Barack Obama/Bill Clinton unfortunately (although that would be swell!), because the 12th Amendment says "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." *single tear*
The following post is in response to a question posed in the Barack Obama (One Million Strong for Barack Obama) Facebook group: "Who should be Barack Obama's Vice Presidential running mate when (not if) he wins the Democratic nomination?"
