There’s no rule that a president and VP can’t be from the same state…
…although there’s a common misconception to that effect. I noticed a couple of people mentioning the supposed rule yesterday in the comments – thus, this post.
There’s no law or regulation against a president and vice president of the United States being from the same state. The reason why some people mistakenly believe such a prohibition exists comes down to a particular aspect of the Electoral College system laid out in Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
Article II states: “The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves.”
Under the original system, electors did not distinguish between candidates for the nation’s top two offices; the candidate with the most votes became president, while the runner-up became vice president. The 12th Amendment, adopted in 1804 after two chaotic elections, mandated that electors cast separate ballots for president and vice president. However, the rule preventing an elector from voting for two people from his home state remained in effect under the new system.
In most elections, this quirk in the system wouldn’t even matter.
In other words, a candidate for president can choose a VP from his or her home state. Nothing prohibits it and in most elections it’s fine. However – and this can be a rather big “however” – in a close election, and if the home state of both has many electoral votes, it can end up mattering.
How would it go if the election results were close, and the electors in Florida were prohibited from voting for both members of a (highly unlikely anyway) Trump/DeSantis ticket? Here are some possibilities:
One possible scenario is the Electoral College would vote to elect the new president but not elect the vice president. In that case, the election of the next vice president would become the work of the U.S. Senate, where each senator would get one vote.
If that vote is miraculously tied — well, we’re not sure what would happen next. Some people say the sitting vice president might get to break the tie. Others note that the vice president is not a senator, which is the process spelled out in the Twelfth Amendment…
Another possible scenario is that the Electoral College would vote to elect a new vice president and not a president. In this case, the U.S. House of Representatives would break that deadlock, with members of each state casting a single vote. A majority wins.
So it seems that nothing would prohibit it. But in these day of razor-thin victories, it would be highly inadvisable. Back in 2000, Cheney clarified – prior to the election – that he was a Wyoming resident rather than a Texas resident, in order to be Bush’s running mate and avoid the problem entirely. Recalling how close that 2000 election was, it turned out to be a good move on his part.
As I already wrote, though, I believe chances are extremely dim that Trump and DeSantis would ever run on the same ticket (note, by the way, Trump’s latest mendacious and hypocritical claim against DeSantis. That linked article also describes DeSantis’ stance on the IRS and taxation.)
Trump-DeSantis???
Surely you must be thinking about Scott-Haley!
In Trump’s more coherent dreams maybe. If he has any of those.
Trump may have a problem finding a credible running mate. I would imagine that anyone with a sense of self-worth would avoid him like a plague.
Aside from the real likelihood that the individual would be tied to a losing ticket; it is worth noting that Trump fired several of his cabinet members in just four years. He verbally trashed most of the remainder; as well as his previous Vice President.
I’m not quite sure I agree with that logic. While it is literally true that the wording doesn’t require the President and VP be from different states, as opposed to the positive requirement an elector not vote for two candidates from their home state, calling it a ‘quirk’ makes it sound like the writers of the 12th Amendment were unaware or couldn’t figure out how their changes would operate with the original provision. I think that’s unlikely. I expect they did understand that retaining the original language would work to force tickets to be geographically dispersed without adding additional verbage. No ticket would willing give up EVs even if you could Rube-Goldberg a way to elect some one President or VP without them
I may be wrong, but I think that the perception that the president and vice president cannot be from the same state arises from the fact that the two candidates of a political party never are. That’s because you want to have candidates from different states to draw “favorite son” votes from two states rather than just one.
Harris-Newsom and Newsom-Harris are also probably off the table.
It wouldn’t be a bad thing if California’s 54 electoral votes were off the table and not counted, though.
I would love for Newsom-Harris to be the Democrat ticket.
Newsom could run on his record. Explain how his dictatorial tendencies, and his fiscal management expertise would benefit the country. Maybe try to explain why anyone who can manage it is leaving his state. (I am stuck here for age-health reasons.)
Harris could highlight her brilliant intellect as well as her performance as “Border Czarina.” Her debate performance could possibly win a comedy award. Of course it could also trigger a sympathy reaction.
But the ticket is probably irrelevant, as 2020 demonstrated. Josef Stalin nailed it.
I plead guilty to promoting the meme I believed that there was a rule against it – a rule against EC voters voting for both a P & VP from the same state is close, but not quite the same.
[Karaoke song in the future: Arctic Monkeys: “Cornerstone” (can I call you her name?). Now I’m listening to “Everybody Wants To Rule The World”.]
I now agree with Neo’s claim that Trump has been “off” since his Covid recovery in 2020, as well as the stolen election then. It’s a bit sad to me to see how many Reps do NOT want to believe the election was stolen. I also thought there was some 40-60% chance DeSantis wouldn’t run this time (me wrong. Again.)
I don’t believe DeSantis or any non-Trump Rep will get more than 65 million votes. And I do believe the Dems will try to steal the election, again, with some success in getting more votes counted than they deserve.
And I’m already tired of the Rep-Rep fighting, but know it’s in the pipeline for the next … 14 months. (July 15, 2024 – Milwaukee, WI)
Ramaswamy’s 8 year term limits on Fed bureaucrats is the single best politically feasible idea I’ve seen, so I’ll be re-tweeting him on Twitter, tho I’m far more often on substack, and even a bit more on substack notes.
Pingback:Instapundit » Blog Archive » JUST AN FYI: There’s no rule that a president and VP can’t be from the same state…
Sorry Oldflyer, but Vivek is putting himself out there as a possible vice-president. He is totally credible, but obviously isn’t going to win the Presidential nomination. He is nonetheless an attractive VP candidate, being smart, articulate and “of color”. Easily smart enough to keep Old Donald on side. If he spends four good years as VP he would be the frontrunner for President. Otherwise, he has no chance.
At the time, this was to prevent both the President and Vice-President from being Virginians. Very large state, with a lot of leaders with national recognition from the state. Today, it works the same way against California, Florida and Texas, and is probably still a good thing.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/05/26/donald-trumps-america-first-vs-ron-desantis-and-the-multinationals/#more-247092
I don’t see that the electors must vote for the combined ticket. In point of fact if the ticket were DeSantis/Eller just as a for instance, the electors could elect DeSantis and Trump as VP.
As I read the Constitution, there is nothing to prevent the electors from a state voting for the presidential choice coming from their own state and then abstaining or voting for a nobody for VP. Only party/partisan loyalty restrains electors from splitting their vote. Of course in a weird scenario, that might leave the US with a President and VP of different parties. The imagination whirls, especially if the Senate turns out equally divided again.