01-23-05: The Pageantry of Politics by Nathan Barton

The Pageantry of Politics
by Nathan Barton

An old and dear friend of mine today sent me one of those joke e-mails, like we all get, that brighten up our day with a dozen silly items. This was one of them:

“How come we choose from just two or four people to run for president and 50 for Miss America? Wouldn't it be great if we ran the presidental selection process like the Miss America process?”

Somehow, that hit me in the right spot at the right time. Indeed, it would be great if we chose a president for the nation every four years, just like we annually (vicariously, at least) choose that “model of American womanhood.”

Just think:

Each state would select its best candidate in a contest that would involve at least one nominee from every major city or county in that state, and would be done however that state decided would let it best compete with all the other states. (Only real states; no candidate from DC or PR, please!)

Each state's nominee and first runner-up would go to some central place. (Naah, not Atlantic City – we want people to take this seriously! How about Las Vegas? Or Omaha?) There they would go through a series of competitions, including testing on knowledge of government and current affairs, history, speaking skill, marksmanship, negotiating, and of course, formal dress and sportswear. (No, no swimwear – I am afraid the nation’s sewer systems couldn’t take it.) These events would be broadcast on CSPAN, and the audience would vote on each candidate's performance. If it turns out a state's nominee is disqualified (because they appeared in a porn movie, or lip-synched, or something, like that one Miss America did), they have the state’s runner-up take their place.

The "selection committee" would consist of electors from each state (535 total, just like our present electoral college, so we don’t have to amend the Constitution). But states would select the “electors” by random names drawn from voter registration lists. It would use the first audience votes in deciding which ten go to the finals

The finals, of course, would also be broadcast and repeat some of the same tests, based again on the audience’s desires as well as the selection committee.

All the candidates have to give all their personal information to the committee: health, finance, education, experience, etc., just like the contestants for Miss America. No padding (of bodies or résumés), please.

All voting by the selection committee would be public, and include their rating of the candidates on the various competitions.

The winner, would of course, become the president. The old president would have to work with the new one for at least six months after the new one takes office – regardless of how much they might hate each other – just like in the Miss America Pageant.

The first runner-up would become the vice-president. I know, it is a career ender, but it has nice perks, and who knows, maybe they’ll get lucky!

The second runner up would be the US Ambassador to the UN. That way, the rest of the world will know that whoever is pounding his (or her) shoe on the podium has a lot of support here in the US, not just some campaign donor of the current president.

The third runner-up would take the next available seat open on the Supreme Court. Yeah, I know they might have to wait a few years, but so what if they age? They don’t have to walk that runway again. And that way, they have a chance to study up. It sure can’t hurt.

Nobody could ever run again. Just like the Pageant, you get one chance, for life, above the state level.

If the winner ever did anything that was found out after the fact (again like that one Miss America) or anything that appeared to demean the office (not did, but just gave the appearance thereof), they would have to resign and the next person moved up. (That's why the second runner-up goes to the UN. Then you call up runner-up #5 to go waggle their tonsils at the UN.)

Instead of a campaign taking up to four years, the entire process should only take six months. I figure, start the local city/county contests in April, the state ones in June (you want to have plenty of time to sell advertising and sponsoring), the first go-around in August, and the finals the end of October, so everyone can rubberstamp it on the first Tuesday in November (remember, we don’t want to have to amend the Constitution). Or we could squeeze it together more: local in September, state in October, elect the randomly selected selection committee in November and do the preliminaries in November, and do the finals in December. It would fit right in with the holiday season, in that gap between Thanksgiving and Christmas, when the advertising revenues would be at their greatest!

The entire thing would be paid for by advertising and sponsorships - no taxpayer money or campaign contributions would be accepted, used, or needed. In fact, if it was done right, the advertising should pay not just for the various contests, but for the inauguration, and maybe even the President’s salary for the whole four years.

It might be so popular that we would have to have a Constitutional Amendment after all, to shorten the terms of President so that we could do this every year, just like the Miss America Pageant. Or we could stagger that with, say, the Secretary General Pageant on alternate years, and work out some sort of deal with the Russians and the Brits to do something similar to fill in the gaps. Or not have the Second Runner-up be appointed to the Supreme Court and instead use the off-years to pick Supreme Court justices.

The states that wanted to could even chose their governors that way, because at least they’d be known to the entire country, and think how much hassle that would save!

I’m sure that a hot-shot marketing type could think of endless ways to fatten this: eventually we might get a big chunk of the national budget (and that pesky UN fund, too) paid for this way.

Gee, wouldn't that be neat? Yeah, I know, we’d still have Congress around, but I figure someone who has to tap-dance, do an extemporaneous speech, play an instrument or sing a song, talk about his/her hopes and aspirations for the future, take a 200-question quiz on current events (even if it is multiple choice), and survive listening to Bert Parks or Robin Williams or whoever sing, “There he/she is, Mr/Ms President,…” all on national tee-vee, live, rehearsals or not, will have the guts to stand up and tell Congress to shut up and sit down.

And the rest of the world would know, for certain, that you don’t dare tick off the United States of America, because we are certifiably insane, and no foolin’! At least in their eyes. But then, 200 years ago, they thought a republic without a king or queen or anything was an insane experiment, too.

For a slightly different view, see Anthony Gregory’s column.

Nathan Barton is a libertarian writing from the fringes of sanity and the Black Hills (or is it the Great Basin?), and stays away from people with too many initials after their names. He is normally found writing for “Mama Liberty” in The Price of Liberty, but sometimes, he slips off the leash (or is it the lease?) and has to be tracked down and lassoed again. He welcomes comments and responses, but you might be really disgusted if you knew what perverted things he does with them, so unless you want to be a facilitator (or an instigator), think twice.