Monday, March 24, 2008

Well, I Guess It's One Way to Solve the Problem . . .

Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale Law Professor (and the author of several great books on Constitutional theory and history; America's Constitution: A Biography and The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction are particularly excellent if you're interested in the subject), has a piece up on Slate proposing a bizarre but legal solution to the tight Democratic primary. Money quote:

But which should it be: Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton? In fact, voters in November could actually endorse both versions of the ticket—truly, two presidents for the price of one. How? The Constitution's 25th Amendment allows for a new paradigm of political teamwork: The two Democratic candidates could publicly agree to take turns in the top slot.

Adopted in 1967 in the shadow of John F. Kennedy's assassination, the 25th Amendment allows presidents unilaterally to transfer presidential power to their vice presidents and enables presidents, with congressional consent, to fill a vacancy in the vice presidency should one arise. By creatively using the constitutional rules created by this amendment, the Democrats can, if they are so inclined, present the voters in November with a new kind of balanced ticket.

Seeing those two running together (as Co-Presidents, no less) would produce some hilarious and awkward moments on the campaign trail, hmm? Sounds like fun.

No comments: