No, that's not a typo. The recent election again raised the issue in my mind that IMHO, there's something wrong with our election process. I am not commenting on the outcome, just the process. Specifically, the process of selecting the Vice President, the person a heartbeat away from our highest office. The issue I have is that we, the people, don't get to select the person we feel is best to be in the second highest position in our government. We used to:

"Under the Constitution's original provision for election, the person receiving the second highest number of electoral votes in the presidential election became vice president. In the event of a second-place tie, the Senate decided who would become vice president. The 12th Amendment, approved in 1804, specified that the Electoral College cast separate ballots to choose the president and the vice president.
The 25th Amendment enabled the president to appoint a vice president if there is a vacancy in that office. The appointment is subject to approval by a majority of both houses of Congress. There was no procedure for filling the office prior to the adoption of the 25th Amendment in 1967; before that time, when a vice president resigned or died in office-or assumed the presidency-the position of vice president remained vacant until the next election. In the 19th century six vice presidents died while in office, and one, John C. Calhoun, resigned from the post in 1832."

Now, the Vice President is selected by the candidate for President, usually for 'strategic' reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with running the country:

"Presidential candidates select their vice-presidential running mates, usually after consultation with political party leaders. Candidates for the vice presidency are usually selected to balance a party's election ticket. A presidential candidate from the Northeast, for example, might choose a vice-presidential candidate from a southern state with the hope of winning more votes from the South. Thus vice-presidential candidates usually earn a place on the ticket because they have personal traits, regional ties, or some other quality that complements the person running for president. Because of the need to appeal to voters across the country, vice-presidential candidates tend to be leaders of national stature, such as governors and experienced members of Congress. Once they have finished their terms, vice presidents often run for election to the presidency itself."

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761556365/vice_president_of_the_united_states.html

What do you think? Is it time to return to our roots?

Views: 29

Comment

You need to be a member of Brandergy to add comments!

Comment by Paul Dube on August 21, 2009 at 9:55am
I see your point Vincent - too bad it has so little effect when an obviously bad decision is made. Ex. Dan Quayle
Comment by Paul Dube on March 10, 2009 at 10:12am
Good point Vincent. However, imagine President Quayle.

Understood Mike, However, the Electoral College was a "good thing" in it's day too and I'm not so sure that it is still. Besides, what if there were no parties and all candidates were independents, running on their own platforms?
Comment by Vincent Wright on March 10, 2009 at 8:48am
Agreed, Paul.

However, there is one important factor about the current process which I think is important: the Vice Presidential selection is the most significant example of decision making we see pre-election...

+Vincent

Brandergy.com: A community of professionals focused on brand strategy for brand energy.

© 2019   Created by Vincent Wright.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service