Line of Succession

I fully recognize this is an odd thought, but an aside in a Gail Collins column this morning struck me with some force. In the midst of musing about the age of various candidates, she wrote: "Let’s take a minute out and try to imagine what would happen if a series of crises struck the country so that we ran through the line of succession in rather short order. Governed by Dick Cheney. Then Nancy Pelosi. Then Robert Byrd. Then Condoleezza Rice. It sounds like the kind of experiment they perform on lab rats." I laughed. Then, I shuddered.

When I think seriously, the only one on this list that gives me any confidence the country wouldn't collapse in short order is Condi. Honest to God. Condi. And I'm not even that sure about her; she's spent her entire life in service to others. I'm not sure she can order breakfast without permission from W. Still, she's about it.

The line of succession runs through the Vice President, the Speaker of the House, the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Secretary of State. Presumably, presidential candidates truly will select a running mate who inspires the country with confidence. Dick Cheney would be a complete disaster as a president, but there's little to be done there. We were dumb enough to elect him.

It is the Congress that scares me. This is not an idle issue nor is my paranoia merely a symptom of the times. Remember, John Wilkes Booth did not act alone. The night he shot Lincoln, another assassin severely injured the Secretary of State, William Seward, and a third was supposed to kill Vice President Andrew Johnson but the supposed killer lost his nerve and never made the attack. Civil War buff that I am, I still don't have any idea who was Speaker of the House in 1865. But I cannot imagine he was qualified to be president. Neither is Nancy Pelosi. Heck, the very worst episodes of the West Wing centered on these issues. That alone should tell us something. We can't even fictionalize this stuff with any plausibility.

As we found out from Gerald Ford, the former House minority leader and speaker wannabe who became, briefly, Vice President and then President after Nixon's resignation, House members are not generally of presidential timber. They represent one small district. They've spent years crawling up the leadership ladder, representing entirely safe seats, with little in the way of rhetorical or national political skills. Competitive elections are completely foreign to them. They know how to cut deals among House members. That's about it.

The Senate is worse. The pro tem position is, believe it or not, an honorary post. I mean, come on. President Robert Byrd. Much as I admire FDR, I'm not sure we should now have a president who knew him. Byrd is 90.

We need a constitutional amendment eliminating the congressional leadership. Inserting them into the line of succession was a nod by the founders to a government of the "best men" that never happened, much like the notion, quickly corrected, that the person with the most votes became president and the person with the second most votes became vice president (Hello, Vice President Kerry). The senior cabinet officials are far more likely to gain the confidence of the country (think Colin Powell vs. Denny Hastert--that was the choice) than Speakers of the House. Plus, they are also more likely to be of the same political party; that, too, could pose a legitimacy problem. Imagine the outcry if President Pelosi began pulling all of our troops out of Iraq.

In the meantime, the Senate needs to get serious. Honestly, people. These men or, in the future, women, could be president. Yes, it's generally honorary. But there's one chance in a million that it won't be honorary. It will be presidential. Pick someone plausible.

Comments

[Jen M.]

Dear O.A.

It's like your post was designed to make me comment. Have you decided to smoke out all of your lurkers this week or something? Because, um gosh, I would hate to think that you despise the will of the people as much as your post indicates. As you well know the Founders had hoped that the president and vice-president would be elected by the House; or, better yet, just like they did under the Articles of Confederation, that the president would be _from_ the House.

The current line of succession may not be your ideal, but the people have chosen it nonetheless. We must all trust the collective wisdom of the people, it is a republic, after all.

xoxo
Jen

[oa]

Jen, I love the will of the people. I'm not sure what it has to do with an institution that gerrymanders itself like the House; better than 90% of its members get reelected. Didn't Tom DeLay "organize" elections for you Texans? By the by, is there a president who's ever been directly elected from the House?

And I'd also note that the Founders were perfectly happy with succession through the Secretary of State; in fact, they pretty much cut out the VP after 1800. I repeat: Colin Powell or Denny Hastert? Madeline Albright or Newt Gingrich? Jim Baker or Tom Foley? It's not always this easy, but the pattern is clear.

[jen m]

Well, I suppose Tommy's "election" in 1800 (happy birthday today Tommy!) and John Quincy Adams in 1824 are probably the best examples of the House choosing the president. After JQA the Jacksonians changed the way parties function in the election process, didn't they?

The Secretary of State made the most sense for the succession because the job of president was understood to be chiefly about foreign relations, which is one of the reasons why the House gave JQA the job over Andy Jack. Still could (should?) be, I think.

And, I agree that we shouldn't let politicians lay down in office (incumbent is such a lovely word, is it not?)

And, what do you mean by the House gerrymanders itself? I'd like to hear more about that. My understanding of the gerrymander is that it occurs at the state level, how could the House gerrymander itself?

Maybe we just both don't like the party system and its effects on elections? My dislike of parties seems to have grown of late...

I'm happy to hear that you love the will of the people, I didn't really doubt ya on that!

[oa]

Tom Delay is the perfect example of the ways in which the House gerrymanders itself; he went back to Texas and used his influence to ram through a redistricting plan. Powerful House incumbents have enormous leverage with state legislatures controlled by their own party because, after all, they bring home the federal bacon.

Those two occasions are the times when the House chose a president. I didn't quite mean that. I meant that the American people don't think of House members, even Speakers, as people of presidential timber. I can't recall a candidate from the House ever winning the White House. James Blaine, I think, came close. Dick Gephardt did not. For at least a century, as far as I can remember, Gephardt is about the only member of the House leadership to make a serious try for the presidency. Jack Kemp was not a member of the leadership. In a time of crisis, such as a succession, I think you sort of want someone with national stature.