At first I thought it was funny, seeming that Ryan doesn’t have much faith in Romney winning president, and that it would seem weird for Wisconsin TV watchers to see an ad for Ryan for Congress right after an ad for Romney/Ryan for the White House. But I was wondering if this has been done before. I don’t remember any candidates in previous presidential elections running for another race at the same time, and I can’t find any other instances, but I thought maybe there was someone I was forgetting or overlooking. I know there has been many times a senator or governor has left his seat to go to the White House, and then there has been a special appointment or special election, but usually those are in the middle of a term, not when running for two positions at the same time.
Also, it seems that chances are that Obama will win reelection. But does anyone know what would happen if Romney won and Ryan won his congressional election? I haven’t seen any explanation on what would happen there. Would the seat go to one of his primary challengers? Or would there be another special election right after the regular election? Is there precedent?
Moderators- I put this in General Questions, since I was curious about previous instances of this happening, and not just about Ryan, but feel free to move it if you think it better belongs in Elections.
Several VP candidates have done it. Lyndon Johnson (1960), Lloyd Bentsen (1988), Joe Lieberman (2000), and of course Joe Biden in 2008. There have probably been a few others.
Federal law prohibits people from serving in multiple federal offices simultaneously. Ryan would have to resign his House seat before taking office as VP. In that case, the governor of Wisconsin would call a special election to fill the vacancy in Ryan’s district.
Wasn’t Gore a sitting Senator when he ran as VP? Did he just decline to run for his old Senate seat?
LBJ had to get Texas to change state law to let him run for two offices. So while its constitutional, I image a few other states might have laws against it.
Yes, it’s pretty much par for the course in American politics when legislators are running for another office, not just president or VP, and their term as a legislator is up at the same time. Since US senators have a six year term, it will often simply be the case that a senator is in mid-term when they run for president, VP or state governor. In either case, they will have to resign their senate position after being elected to the other office. Elections in the US often mean special elections and/or governor’s appointments in a few states to replace a senator or two.
The replacement procedure differs from state to state. The most common procedure is for the governor to appoint an interim replacement until a special election is held, or the next regular election comes up. In some cases the governor is restricted in some way, such as being required to appoint a replacement from the same party as the resigning senator, or choose from a list of candidates presented by the central committee of the party. Some states also require an immediate special election, allowing the seat to remain vacant until it takes place, and don’t involve the governor.
No, it isn’t. I’ve never heard of anyone running for Senator or Representative, and any office other than President or Vice President, at the same time. Most (all?) states don’t allow it.
An elected Member of Congress takes their oath the first week in January after the election. The President and Vice-President take their oaths on January 20. So it’s conceivable for Ryan to win both elections, take his oath as a Member of Congress in the new session, tender his resignation, then take the oath as the new VP.
Why would he do that? Well, two more weeks as a Member of Congress gets added to his federal retirement, annual leave, sick leave, etc. In addition, were the Republicans to win both houses and the presidency, Ryan could spearhead passage of legislation as a ranking Member, then resign, become the VP and help ensure the President signs it into law.
Some political pundits are playing up Ryan’s dual election as a sign he has little faith in the presidential race. Whether that is true is one thing. That he is doing it makes some business sense from a practical point of view.
I had forgotten that Biden was up for election in 2008. He won that election and one of his political advisers, Ted Kaufman was appointed until a special election was held in 2010. According to Wikipedia, Biden’s opponent in the election, Christine I’m-Not-A-Witch O’Donnell tried to make an issue of Biden running two campaigns at one, but I guess that story was overshadowed by Obama, and Palin acting crazy, and other stories and that’s why I don’t remember it.
Right, I’d seen some people use this another way to make fun of Ryan and Romney. Which made me wonder if this was a somewhat unique situation, or if it was something that other presidential or vice-presidential candidates had done before, and the previous instances weren’t getting mentioned because it’s fun to make fun of Ryan and Romney.
Warren G. Harding ran for President in 1920, and was up for reelection for Senator. He filed as a candidate (the deadline was before he got the nomination), but withdrew. Frank Willis was elected instead. Harding resigned from the Senate early and Willis appointed to finish out his term, giving Willis some added seniority.
It usually wasn’t an issue. Presidential candidates were usually not Senators or Representatives, so the issue didn’t come up often. They were more likely to be governors, whose elections were in different years that a presidential elections. Someone like FDR would have been governor for two more years if he lost to Hoover, for instance. It was thought that congressmen and Senators did not make good candidates for president because they would have to neglect their jobs to get the nomination. Harding seems to be the first sitting senator to get the nomination.
Also Stephen Douglas in 1860. But of course dual candidacy was a non-issue before the direct election of senators, and in any case Douglas’ term didn’t expire in 1860.
James A. Garfield won both a senate and presidential election in 1880, but again this was before direct election. He was elected to the Senate by the Ohio legislature in January (for the term starting in March 1881) and then won the presidential election in November. After winning the latter he naturally declined the former, so that the legislature could elect somebody else.
Nitpick on FDR: In his day the NY governor had a two-year term. Candidates for governor were nominated at state conventions in September, so Roosevelt had plenty of time to get out of the 1932 race (which he did) after winning the presidential nomination.
Adlai Stevenson faced a different calendar in Illinois in 1952. Illinois at that time elected governors in presidential years, and the primary was in April. Stevenson was renominated for governor, but then later won the presidential nomination setting up a theoretical dual candidacy. He withdrew from the gubernatorial race. Running for president (or VP) and governor at the same time would be over the top, more so than VP and Congress, and to my knowledge no one has ever done it. Nowadays there are only a handful of states that elect governors in presidential years so the opportunity is anyhow reduced.
Joe Lieberman running for the Senate in 2000 is the one which sticks in my [del]craw[/del] memory. He was sure to win the Senate race, as any alternate Democrat candidate would have been, but had he also won the V.P., he’d have forfeited the Senate seat to a person of the Republican Governor’s choice.
In other words, had Gore-Lieberman won in 2000, the Senate would have had one fewer Democrat than it would have if Lieberman had not acted selfishly. Given that the Senate did end up split 50-50, this was hardly a trivial matter.
I was outraged that a “loyal” Democrat could do that … and even more outraged (and flabbergasted) that I seemed to be the only person in the country who was outraged. :dubious:
Gore was in the middle of his second 6-year term when he ran for VP. The Senate was something he could fall back on in case of defeat, kind of like dentistry.
Bob Dole, on the other hand, resigned his Senate seat two years early to run for President in '96. I seem to recall that this choice was viewed as somewhat unusual at the time.