America’s heirs apparent actually important, need to be sane

In less than three weeks Americans will go to the polls with but one idea in mind: who will be the next president of the United States. Little thought will be given to the name that sits almost inconspicuously below “President”: that of “Vice President.” This is a huge mistake. Few Americans seem to remember that if the president were to die or get ill to the point of incapacitation, then the country would be stuck with an individual to whom they paid little attention.
Vice presidents have played key roles in policymaking throughout U.S. history, and in recent times the importance of the vice president is perhaps most noted during President George W. Bush’s two terms. Despite being constantly mocked, Dick Cheney has been lauded as the most influential vice president of all time. His post was not solely ceremonial—he served as the President’s closest advisor and a key player in various policy decisions. He was instrumental in defining what constitutes torture, ensuring that climate change was all but ignored, and shaping budget and tax policy. If anything, Dick Cheney demonstrates the potential of the position to shape the direction the country takes.
In this century in particular, both parties have been guilty of fielding controversial choices for vice president. In 2000, former Vice President Al Gore chose Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) as his running mate. An open supporter of liberal causes such as repealing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and the right of the LGBT community to adopt children, Lieberman is also criticized for his hawkish approach to national security. Most alarmingly, Lieberman has been a great proponent of increased surveillance on the American public and a noted opponent to Internet free speech.
Governor Sarah Palin, the first Republican female vice presidential candidate: what a waste that historic moment was. Not only did she lack the credentials or pedigree, but she was also an insulting choice to garner the “women’s vote.” The question of her eventually becoming president was not all that remote a possibility, considering Sen. John McCain’s previous bout with melanoma and various war wounds. She was, and is, completely incompetent, and yet in the event of the tragic death of Sen. McCain, she would have led the nation.
In this election season, the GOP has chosen yet another newbie candidate who lacks the experience to be trusted with the position of Commander-in-Chief should that be necessary.
While the current presidential race may be between President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney, it is just as important to consider that either Vice President Joe Biden or Senator Paul Ryan could be president as well. Vice President Biden is far from the most presidential and eloquent man to take his post in recent memory, likely due to his almost 40 years of experience in public office. He is well respected on foreign policy, civil liberties, and crime, and is generally considered a moderate. He lacks neither the background nor the charisma to be a competent president.
Paul Ryan, on the other hand, is brand new to the arena. He has little foreign policy experience, a very questionable plan for reducing the federal budget, an appalling environmental record, and a religious doctrine that alienates non-Christians. How and why does the GOP keep choosing vice presidential candidates that they would never field as presidential candidates?
There was a time when great care was taken in choosing a vice president, when there was a very real possibility that he or she would have to step up and run the show. This country has seen men like Lyndon B. Johnson, Harry S. Truman, and Theodore Roosevelt take the helm when their predecessors met untimely deaths. Each one of these men was responsible for a very important piece of American history: LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Truman dropped the bomb that ended World War II, and Roosevelt busted the monopolies and created thousands of acres of national parks. These men were not chosen for the highest office directly by the electorate, but they nonetheless had all the presidential qualities required. Even Chester Arthur, whom the history books often forget, reformed the U.S. Civil Service, creating a meritocracy instead of one based on cronyism.
Lest we forget, however, that others who came to power in a similar manner and were not nearly as successful. Andrew Johnson botched the Reconstruction of the South, Calvin Coolidge allowed laissez-faire to lay the groundwork for the Great Depression, and Millard Fillmore signed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. These men serve as a reminder of the carelessness of certain presidents in choosing their successors.
There needs to be a greater level of accountability on behalf of presidential candidates and voters as to the quality of vice presidential candidates. While many ignore them, choosing to focus solely on the presidential candidates, these men and women are heirs apparent. It is time that we as a nation start recognizing them as such.