Because the third time is the charm? Arizona does not need a Lieutenant Governor

In some ways you have to admire the persistence of Tea-Publicans. No matter how many times their bad ideas get rejected by the voters, they just keep coming back year after year to try again, hoping that the next time will be the charm.

I wish many of the Democrats I have worked with over the years had this kind of sticktoitiveness. Too many of them have taken defeat personally, and lose their will to fight the good fight again. They could use the political fortitude of Arizona legend Mo Udall, who reprised a line from California politician Dick Tuck after losing to Jimmy Carter in 1976: “The people have spoken — the bastards!”

What has become a perennial bad idea from Tea-Publicans is their desire for a Lieutenant Governor in Arizona.

There is recent historical reason for this, as Arizona Secretaries of State have succeeded to the governorship several times since the late 1970’s. Secretary of State Wesley Bolin (D) succeeded Governor Raul Castro (D) when he became an ambassador in 1977, then died a few months later; Attorney General Bruce Babbitt (D) succeeded him, and was elected governor in his own right. Secretary of State Rose Mofford (D) succeeded Governor Evan Mecham (R) when he was impeached in 1988. Secretary of State Jane Dee Hull (R) succeeded Governor J. Fife Symington III (R) when he was forced to resign from office in 1997. And Secretary of State Jan Brewer (R) succeeded Governor Janet Napolitano (D) when she was appointed Secretary of Homeland Security in 2009.

The current proposal HB 2265 (.pdf) is similar to the model used in several other states. When a candidate for governor wins his or her party nomination, a running mate for Lieutenant Governor is selected by the nominee, for the first time — not by the voters in the party primary. Both candidates then run together as a team on the ballot, which means that most voters will vote for the gubernatorial candidate without giving a second thought to who the Lieutenant Governor running mate. Supporters will argue that this is how we select a president and vice president. Not quite; party conventions can determine the VP nominee, but frequently endorse the nominee’s selection.

Given Arizona’s recent history of successions to governor, is this really the best system for Arizona? Do we really want some candidate’s flunky, who never had to face the voters to ask for their vote, to succeed to governor?

In states with a Lieutenant Governor, this position has frequently been the subject of political corruption and scandals. Many Lieutenant Governors have been forced to resign from office in recent years. Why? Because the position really has no function other than succession, despite the window dressing often attached to the job. “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop,” as the saying goes.

John Nance Garner, Vice President under Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1941), observed that the office of Vice President “is not worth a bucket of warm spit.” The office of Lieutenant Governor is worth even less.

I have to agree with the sarcasm of The Republic’s Laurie Roberts, Just what Arizona needs: another elected official!:

Arizona legislators are once again pushing to create yet another elective post for aspiring politicians.

Twice, voters have declined to create the job of lieutenant governor, believing that it works just fine to have the secretary of state jump in if the governor moves on to greener pastures — or, as sometimes happens, a criminal trial.

Faced with all that voter rejection, what are a bunch of ambitious politicians to do?

Why, try, try try again, of course. Every year, in fact.

 HB 2265 (.pdf) – setting the duties for the office of lieutenant governor — cleared the Arizona House on Tuesday, 34-26.House Concurrent Resolution 2024 (.pdf) – asking voters in 2016 to amend the state constitution to create the job of lieutenant governor — is awaiting a final House vote.

* * *

The bill is sponsored by Rep. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, who touts his proposal as a chance to ensure “continuity” from one administration to the next.

Never mind that voters see no need for a lieutenant governor.

In 1994, 68 percent of voters rejected the idea. In 2010, 53 percent shot down a proposal to turn the secretary of state into lieutenant governor – a stunning loss given that supporters spent 11 times more than opponents.

Tea-Publicans are hoping that the third time is the charm. But to what end?

Just reject this perennial bad idea from Tea-Publicans.