[EL] my latest blog: Vice-Presidential Running Mates: They Really Don?t Matter Much

[David A. Schultz]

Hi all:

I thought many of you might be interested in my most recent blog.

My latest blog:  Vice-PresidentialRunning Mates:  They Really Don?t MatterMuch

http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/2012/07/vice-presidential-running-mates-they.html


Speculation over who Mitt Romney will select as hisvice-presidential running mate is reaching a fever pitch.  Will it be Rob Portman from Ohio to help himcapture that swing state, or will it be Mark Rubio from Florida to shore upthat state and support with Hispanic voters? Or will it be Tim Pawlenty from Minnesota, a working class socialconservative to balance Romney’s Richy Rich image and mercurial support fromthe religious conservatives?
            Whiletremendous fuss is made over vice-presidential selection and convention wisdom declaresthat Veep selection can balance a ticket and offset presidential liabilities,the truth of the matter is that their value in terms of winning an election isof limited value.  Instead, it is moreapt to say that the primary goal in selecting a vice-president is to find onewho can do no harm.  Beyond that, locatingone that adds real electoral value to the ticket is simply a bonus.
            Thinkabout the office of the vice presidency. It is an odd office with no comparable political office anywhere else inthe world.  The two constitutional dutiesof the vice-president are to president over the Senate and vote to break ties,and then to succeed the president in the event the latter dies or isincapacitated.  As president pro tempvice presidents rarely vote.  Joe Bidenhas yet to cast a tie-breaking vote, Dick Cheney cast 8, Al Gore 4.  Instead, the Senate role for thevice-president is mostly ceremonial.  Theother duty–waiting for the president to die or become incapacitated–doesoccur.  Gerald Ford became president uponRichard Nixon’s resignation, Johnson became president when Kennedy wasassassinated, and Truman assumed the presidency when FDR died.   
            Successionis an important duty and that is why perhaps so much concern is raised over whompresidential candidates select for their Veep. But otherwise, vice-presidentshave duties determined at the pleasure of the president.  They can range from purely ceremonial–attendfunerals–to more substantive such as under Carter and Bush where Mondale andCheney had significant policy roles. One great line about the vice-presidencytells the story of two brothers–one who becomes a missionary to Africa and theother vice-president, and neither were ever heard of again.
            Overtime the criteria for vice-presidential select has varied.  In the early days of the republic thevice-president was the presidential runner up. Federalist Party John Adams won the presidency and hisDemocratic-Republican rival Thomas Jefferson assumed the vice presidency.  Yet the election of 1800 where Jefferson andhis vice-presidential candidate Aaron Burr tied in the Electoral College producedthe Twelfth Amendment that made the presidential and vice-presidentialcandidates a ticket selected together.
            Throughoutmost of the nineteenth century geography was the preferred factor thatdominated vice-presidential selection. Presidential candidates from the north had to select southern or westernrunning mates.  There is little evidencethat such geographic balance really meant anything, but it nonethelesspersisted as a legend important to presidential prospects well into thetwentieth century.  Some point to JFKplacing LBJ on the 1960 ticket as crucial to Democrats winning Texas, thesouth, and the election.  Yet in 1960 thesouth was still Democratic–at least nominally–even as late as 1968 Humphrey wonTexas.
            Wheregeography actually seems important is with favorite son factors.  A vice-presidential   candidate might be useful in terms ofhelping a candidate when the Veep’s home state. However, Lloyd Bentsen did not bring Texas over to Dukakis in 1988 andin 1980 Carter would have won Minnesota regardless of Mondale, Bush would havewon Indiana without Quayle, and Bush would have won Wyoming withoutCheney.   Clinton did win Tennessee in1992 and 1996 with Gore in the ticket after Bush won the state in 1988.  Yet in 2000 as president Gore failed to winhis home state as president.  Obama wonDelaware in 2008 with Biden on the ticket but Kerry also won the state in 2004with John Edwards on the ticket (who failed to win his state of North Carolina).Vice presidents as favorite sons who deliver their home states areinconclusive.
            Thereis little evidence that vice-presidential candidates affect voter turnout orpresidential choice in any significant way. Political science research indicates that for the most part voters selectpresidential candidates based on the person at the top of the ticket, notbecause of who is vice president.  Maybevice-presidential choice sways one perhaps two percent of the voters, but it isnot even clear this is the case. Individuals who are most likely to be swayed by a presidential  selection–swing voters–are often those leastlikely to be politically informed or know who the vice-presidential candidateis.  Survey research in general suggeststhat only 59% of the population according to a Pew study can name who thevice-president is, let alone the candidate, suggesting the limited impact of arunning mate in terms of affecting voter choice.
            Yetthere are possible exceptions. Sarah Palin is potentially one.  By election day 2008 approximately 60%-65% ofpopulation thought she was unqualified to be president or vice president.  This was significant because a sizableportion of the population also expressed concern about John McCain’s age of 72and whether he would survive four years. Palin’s perceived lack of qualifications and high name recognition mayhave cost McCain two or three points in the election, but even then, Obama’slarge victory and the other liabilities that McCain had question whether hereally could have beaten Obama even with a different running mate.  Palin is more an example of another criteriaof vice-presidential selection–at least pick someone who will not hurt the ticketeven if a nominee cannot help.
            Sowhat factors make sense in terms of guiding vice-presidential selection?  Discounting favorite son criteria (will theVeep help win his or her home state) which as noted above is questionable,several factors do make sense.  There arefour possibilities.  First, will thevice-presidential candidate make an effective fund raiser?  Presidential campaigns are expensive bigbusinesses and running mates who can generate cash are useful.  Second, will the vice-president be aneffective pit bill in attacking or criticizing the opponent?  Often presidents do not want to do the dirtywork of attacking the opposition so having a vice-presidential candidate suchas a Robert Dole or a Spiro Agnew is good. 
            Athird factor to consider is whether the vice-presidential candidate serves asan effective symbolic fig leaf to a faction within the party.  Maybe a candidate can reach out to theconservatives or moderates or other constituencies as part of a deal to winsupport or make them feel better about supporting the winner.  This type of selection criteria was moreimportant in days of brokered conventions but one still hears of vicepresidents serving a role in forging unity in a party.  Again, there is limited evidence that avice-presidential candidate selected for this person actually delivers what ispromised. Finally, a vice-presidential candidate may be selected simply becausethe president and this person get along or are friends.  The choice here has little to do withpolitics, it is simply personal. 
            Overall,there is no magic bullet or evidence that declares who Romney shouldselect.  Vice-presidential choices matterfar less than the media and many political pundits seem to think.  Romney is best advised to go with the personhe wants, using it as evidence of what types of decisions or choices he wouldmake as president.  After all, the choiceof vice-president is potentially the first and most important choice apresident can make. 



David Schultz, Professor
Editor, Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE)
Hamline University
School of Business
570 Asbury Street
Suite 308
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
651.523.2858 (voice)
651.523.3098 (fax)
http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/
http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/
http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/
Twitter:  @ProfDSchultz
Named one of the inaugural 2012 FacultyRow SuperProfessors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120716/62d26fe9/attachment.html>