A companion thread Calling GW Bush “Mr. President”. Grammaticaly correct? prompted this thread.
Why is Newt Gingrich, for example, addressed as Mr. Speaker, when he is no longer Speaker of the House, but Ex Speaker of the House?
Why not just Mr. Gingrich?
It’s a matter of courtesy, only – out of respect for the office and for the man who occupied it with enough capability that it didn’t fall apart under him during his term, he gets addressed by the highest office to which he was elected, or the highest judicial office he occupied (whether elected or appointed). But it’s purely a mark of respect for the person and the office he had held, not something established by law. The news here mentions Jesse Helms, who lives in Raleigh, every few months, and he gets referenced as “Senator Helms” – not because they agree with his policies while in office, but simply because he served five terms as this state’s senator. Governor Hunt, who left office in 2000, gets the same treatment.
Also, on first reference in writing, or upon formal presentantion in an in-person appearance, you make clear s/he’s a “former” or “ex-” or “retired” holder of XYZ rank/position – it is afterward, in second reference or in conversation, that you switch to just the title. Thus:
“We have here in the studio Retired General Buck Turgidson, former Chief of Staff of the Air Force, to talk about his new book. Good morning, General Turgidson.” “Good morning, Katie.”
This does not, however, hold true for former presidents. They are correctly identified as “former president” but not properly addressed as “Mister President.” The proper form of address is to revert to a previously held title. Thus, Governor Carter, Governor Clinton, Congressman Ford, Congressman or Ambassador or Director Bush.
No one ever gets this right, of course.
Of course the obvious question is how do you know what’s right then?
Here’s a link to a Miss Manners column where she addresses this issue. The relevant sentence is
So that would apply to a former president as well as a former speaker of the house of representatives, but not a former senator or ambassador.
Well, that makes perfect sense, since after all George W. Bush is President now 
George H. W. Bush, now that’s a different kettle of fish.
D’oh :smack:
This issue comes up from time to time with former or retired judges. Away from the courthouse, I have no problem referring to them as “judge ______”. On occasion, though, an ex-judge will return to the practice of law. Right now, I have an opponent who is an ex-circuit court judge (that’s the trial court level in Illinois). The current judge presiding over the case, who knows him well, has made it very clear (and properly so) that any references to him as “Judge ____” in the courtroom are inappropriate.
And because it is never used this way anymore, the new way has become the correct way. The style pedants can dispute this until they are blue in the face, but they remain wrong.
And Miss Manners can, as always, go take a flying leap, since she is too stupid to notice the contradiction in her own instructions:
A Governorship is only held by one person at a time. Therefore there is a sitting Governor of Georgia. Gov. Carter is non-unique and should not be used. Oops. Her rule apparently is that the one occupant at a time rule doesn’t apply to the former President. But if that’s your standard, there is no longer any reason to not use it for the Presidency itself. Chuck the “rule” and call him Mr. President as every other thinking person does.