Has anyone thought of this yet?
By | Monday, December 5th, 2011 | Catch-All

Amidst the whirl and rush over the 2013 nomination battle for Governor and the possibility of Bob McDonnell being elected Vice President, there is one unusual intersection here.
If McDonnell were to move to Washington, Bill Bolling would not only become Governor; he could also pick his successor as Lieutenant Governor.
How many problems could he solve by picking, say, Ken Cuccinelli?
Remember, you heard it here first.


Tags:

Contribute for Conservatism!

Share this post

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed
  • Share this post on Delicious
  • StumbleUpon this post
  • Share this post on Digg
  • Tweet about this post
  • Share this post on Mixx
  • Share this post on Technorati
  • Share this post on Facebook
  • Share this post on NewsVine
  • Share this post on Reddit
  • Share this post on Google
  • Share this post on LinkedIn

About the author

D.J. McGuire

Former candidate for Board of Supervisors in Spotsylvania, current blogger, economics teacher, and long-rumored windbag. There are two causes closest to the heart: steering the country away from the social democratic nonsense that is sinking Europe, and convincing the rest of the "rightosphere" that the NBA really is a joy to watch.

Comments

15 Responses to "Has anyone thought of this yet?"
  1. Joshua December 5, 2011 12:25 pm

    I’m thinking such a plan is highly unlikely. I doubt that Cuccinelli would accept this offer even if it did come to pass.

  2. Steve Vaughan December 5, 2011 12:37 pm

    If Bolling were the sitting governor I think Cuccinelli would drop his 2013 challenge and run for A.G. again. That’s the ONLY scenario I see where Bolling comes out on top of Cuccinelli.

  3. Hirons December 5, 2011 13:19 pm

    Does the office of Lt.Governor get filled by Gov. appointment? I believe the President pro temp of the Senate takes on duties of Lt. Gov for duration of the term (or perhaps until special election).

  4. Steve Vaughan December 5, 2011 14:31 pm

    Article V, Section 7 of the state constitution says the governor gets to appoint someone who will serve until the next general election….so from Jan. 2013 to Nov. 2013 in this scenario.
    Interesting that the General Assembly fills A.G. vacancies but the governor gets to fill an L.G. vacancy.

  5. Delegate Bob Marshall December 5, 2011 17:45 pm

    Virginia does not fill the office for a vacancy if there is no Lieutenant Governor.

    Here is the only statute that I have found on this topic.
    “§ 24.2-212. Discharge of duties when office of Lieutenant Governor vacant. When a vacancy occurs in the office of Lieutenant Governor, the duties of that office shall be discharged by the President pro tempore of the Senate, but he shall not by reason thereof be deprived of his right to act and vote as a member of the Senate.”

    There is no statute increasing the staff or the salary of the Senate President Pro Tem is he is she serves as the Lt. Governor.

    But if Bob McDonnell is tapped to be VP, it first of all means that Newt Gingrich is not the Republican nominee because the Constitution prohibits the President and Vice President coming from the same state. And if Bob McDonnell becomes the VP after November, 2012, then when Bob McDonnell steps down, Lt. Governor Bill Bolling serves as the next Governor.

    This means that Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli would then be running for Governor against a sitting Governor. Hmmm. Interesting, isn’t it?

    Does anybody want to take any bets on who Ken and Bill are saying prayers for in this next Presidential race?

  6. Steve Vaughan December 6, 2011 09:49 am

    Del. Marshall: Why isn’t Article V, Section 7 of the Virginia Constitution controlling?

    And didn’t Henry Howell become Lt. Gov. by winning a special election to fill a vacancy caused by the death of J. Sargeant Reynolds?

  7. Baring midrift December 6, 2011 15:18 pm

    Bob Marshall: “because the Constitution prohibits the President and Vice President coming from the same state.”

    Actually, no it doesn’t. This is a common myth.

  8. Delegate Bob Marshall December 6, 2011 15:58 pm

    AMENDMENT XII
    Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.
    Part of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment which prohibits the Electors from the Electoral College from choosing the President and Vice President whose residence is in the same state.
    “The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves …”

  9. Rocky December 6, 2011 16:34 pm

    Actually, Bob, the 12th Amendment does not prohibit the President and the Vice President from being from the same State. It merely requires that the Electors cannot cast their ballots for both offices for candidates from their own State. They must vote for a candidate from another State for either President or Vice President.

  10. Rocky December 6, 2011 16:40 pm

    So, if both candidates on the Republican ticket are from Virginia, only the Virginia Electors would be constrained in the Electoral College from voting for both. However, it would be an interesting situation if the difference in the Electoral vote between the Republican and the Democratic tickets nationwide was less than the Virginia electoral votes.

  11. Brian Schoeneman December 6, 2011 17:52 pm

    The 12th amendment is easily avoided. Before the election, Gingrich would simply need to change his voter registration and drivers license. This is what Dick Cheney did in 2000. The case never made it past the 5th Circuit when three Texas voters sued.

    My reading of the VA Constitution (Article V Section 7 as Steve noted) allows for the Governor to appoint a temporary replacement for any Constitutional elected office until the next general election. I don’t see anything else in the document or the code that bars the LG office from being filled in this fashion.

  12. Delegate Bob Marshall December 6, 2011 22:20 pm

    The reason I say the Constitution would not allow both the President and Vice President to be from the same state is a very practical consideration. The Electors are supposed to cast votes in their respective state capitals for the President and the Vice President. If they cast votes for both in Richmond, which set of votes would be counted once they are sent to Congress?
    This Amendment was the last proposed by the Founder’s generation. They did not set up a structure that would have allowed for the result of a state disqualifying their Electoral vote for either President, Vice President or both.

  13. Rocky December 6, 2011 23:28 pm

    Now you are really reaching, Bob. You said, “the Constitution prohibits the President and Vice President coming from the same state.” Now you are trying to convolute the argument with a strawman argument. The Constitution does not prohibit the President and the Vice President coming from the same State. It merely says that Electors may not vote for candidates for both offices from their own State.

    The 12th Amendment was proposed and ratified in the Founders’ period of the republic when there were only 13 States and the likelihood of a deadlocked Electoral College was possible because of the small number of electoral votes involved, throwing the Presidential election into the House of Representatives.

    Are you incapable of admitting a mistake? It certainly seems so.

  14. The BulletProof Monk December 7, 2011 12:43 pm

    Rocky, Knowledge and analysis like yours and Brian S. is what makes this blog experience one that should not be passed by. In a world where most blogs are places where I end up wanting my 2 minutes back…This place is an information depot. Thank you and Brian for that!

  15. Rocky December 7, 2011 17:16 pm

    Monk,

    That is kind of you to say so. It beats the heck out of being called a “condescending jerk” like one of the Radtkacs did yesterday. However, I can’t hold a candle to Brian S. when it comes to politics and the law.

Leave your response

Please take a moment to review our comment policy.