WI: President-Elect and VP-Elect both die before inauguration (pre 1947) - what happens?

So under the Presidential Succession Act of 1886, were the President and VP to both die in office, succession would devolve on all the various cabinet offices, starting with Secretary of State and moving downwards from there.

Under normal (non-nuclear war) circumstances, this should easily be enough people to ensure the office remains filled. But what happens if the Cabinet hasn't been appointed yet? To give a hypothetical: let's say Charles Evans Hughes wins in 1916 (close election) and after four years of war and rough economic times, he is soundly defeated by Speaker of the House Champ Clark (D-MO) and (selected for balance) former DNC head and Wilson confidante, William McCombs (D-NY). An eminently reasonable ticket.

But Vice President-Elect McCombs dies of ill-health in February of 1921 (as OTL), shocking the nation... and on March 2nd (again, as OTL), President-Elect Clark keels over, two days before the inauguration.

Who exactly becomes President? Is it Hughes' Secretary of State (whoever that is), who is (a) a Republican, and (b), hasn't been reappointed to the position by anyone and was clearly going to be replaced? Clark's choice for Secretary of State, which is presumably clear as of two days before the election, and a member of the right party - but not yet appointed? Anyone else?

What exactly happens?
 
There is actually a (fiction) book that deals with this situation. It is called "Line of Succession" by Brian Garfield. Note, I don't have the book so I'm not sure what is in it, except apparently the incumbent president who lost 're election is trying to use the situation to stay in office.

Sorry this doesn't answer your question exactly.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
So under the Presidential Succession Act of 1886, were the President and VP to both die in office, succession would devolve on all the various cabinet offices, starting with Secretary of State and moving downwards from there.

Under normal (non-nuclear war) circumstances, this should easily be enough people to ensure the office remains filled. But what happens if the Cabinet hasn't been appointed yet? To give a hypothetical: let's say Charles Evans Hughes wins in 1916 (close election) and after four years of war and rough economic times, he is soundly defeated by Speaker of the House Champ Clark (D-MO) and (selected for balance) former DNC head and Wilson confidante, William McCombs (D-NY). An eminently reasonable ticket.

But Vice President-Elect McCombs dies of ill-health in February of 1921 (as OTL), shocking the nation... and on March 2nd (again, as OTL), President-Elect Clark keels over, two days before the inauguration.

Who exactly becomes President? Is it Hughes' Secretary of State (whoever that is), who is (a) a Republican, and (b), hasn't been reappointed to the position by anyone and was clearly going to be replaced? Clark's choice for Secretary of State, which is presumably clear as of two days before the election, and a member of the right party - but not yet appointed? Anyone else?

What exactly happens?
My guess is that Congress would quickly pass a new law to sort out this matter.
 
Very interesting scenario. I imagine Congress would quickly pass a law letting the incumbent president stay on or making the Speaker acting President. It would depend on which of the two persons was favored by that particular Congress. So in your scenario, a Republican Congress would extend Hughes's presidency, while a Democratic Congress would designate their Speaker to take the office.
 
Given the era in particular, what I suspect you'd see is someone (of really either party) step up as caretaker POTUS and appoint Clark's SecState choice to Secretary of State and then promptly resign. It's the best of a bad situation.

No way will Hughes be allowed to stay on past Inauguration Day other than a caretaker-type role - the Supreme Court will knock that down like nothing else. What I suspect would happen is you'd see Congress pass a law authorizing the Secretary of State to be appointed for a term extending past the current presidency, which will correspond with the next election cycle. Then on March 4, SecState becomes President as soon as Hughes leaves office.

Along the way, you'll probably see a President can nominate a VP constitutional amendment get passed to avoid the situation in the future.
 
Last edited:
From *The Atlantic*, May 1947:

"It is not generally known that even today the law contemplates at least the possibility of holding a special election. True, the Act of 1886, which now governs the question, specifically repealed the special election provided by the Act of 1792 and, as originally drafted, authorized the Secretary of State to act as President for the unexpired portion of the four-year term. But the bill was violently opposed on its passage: its language was changed so that the Acting President was to exercise the office only "until the disability be removed or a President shall be elected " -- the exact language of the Constitution, which, as we know from Madison, is intended to permit "a supply of the vacancy by an intermediate election of the President"; and an amendment was made requiring the Acting President to call Congress together in special session within twenty days of his succession. In the debates it was made perfectly clear that the object of these changes was to leave it to Congress whether or not to order a special election, as the circumstances of the occasion might suggest..." https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/unbound/flashbks/pres/wilmer.htm
 
From *The Atlantic*, May 1947:

"It is not generally known that even today the law contemplates at least the possibility of holding a special election. True, the Act of 1886, which now governs the question, specifically repealed the special election provided by the Act of 1792 and, as originally drafted, authorized the Secretary of State to act as President for the unexpired portion of the four-year term. But the bill was violently opposed on its passage: its language was changed so that the Acting President was to exercise the office only "until the disability be removed or a President shall be elected " -- the exact language of the Constitution, which, as we know from Madison, is intended to permit "a supply of the vacancy by an intermediate election of the President"; and an amendment was made requiring the Acting President to call Congress together in special session within twenty days of his succession. In the debates it was made perfectly clear that the object of these changes was to leave it to Congress whether or not to order a special election, as the circumstances of the occasion might suggest..." https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/unbound/flashbks/pres/wilmer.htm

So the (outgoing) Secretary of State seems likely to assume the position and almost immediately call a special election?
 

SsgtC

Banned
So the (outgoing) Secretary of State seems likely to assume the position and almost immediately call a special election?

That does seem to make the most sense. And would likely be supported by a broad swath of the population.
 
There is actually a (fiction) book that deals with this situation. It is called "Line of Succession" by Brian Garfield. Note, I don't have the book so I'm not sure what is in it, except apparently the incumbent president who lost 're election is trying to use the situation to stay in office.
The book by Garfield (easily found in epub version) is set post-1947, and written in the early Seventies. It deals with the death (following terror attacks) of the President-Elect, the Vice President-Elect and the Speaker of the House. The President pro tem is old and an arch-conservative, that nobody wants for the Presidency. The sitting President, who has just lost re-election, attempts to use the situation to remain in office.
 
Who exactly becomes President? Is it Hughes' Secretary of State (whoever that is), who is (a) a Republican, and (b), hasn't been reappointed to the position by anyone and was clearly going to be replaced? Clark's choice for Secretary of State, which is presumably clear as of two days before the election, and a member of the right party - but not yet appointed? Anyone else?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would assume that secretaries serve "at the president's pleasure"—ie: they remain in office until dismissed, no re-appointment necessary— and it's only by convention that they resign ahead of an incoming administration. If so… without a President Clark to appoint anyone new, Hughes' SOS would remain in office, and— the POTUS and VPOTUS being vacant— legally ascend to the office.

From there, the SOS either calls a special election (as David T mentions above), or, perhaps, appoints a Democrat to SOS and then promptly resigns. Woodrow Wilson apparently had a similar idea: had he lost to Hughes in '16, he would have arranged for his early assumption of office via appointments and resignations to reduce the lame-duck period in a trying time. So… in this scenario, there may be precedent for the appoint-then-resign option.
 
Last edited:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would assume that secretaries serve "at the president's pleasure"—ie: they don't need to be reappointed, they'll simply stay in office until dismissed— and it's only by convention that they resign ahead of an incoming administration. If so… without a President Clark to appoint anyone new, Hughes' SOS would remain in office, and— the POTUS and VPOTUS being vacant— legally ascend to the office.

From there, the SOS either calls a special election (as David T) mentions above, or, perhaps, appoints a Democrat to SOS and then promptly resigns. Woodrow Wilson apparently had a similar idea: had he lost to Hughes in '16, he would have arranged for his early assumption of office via appointments and resignations to reduce the lame-duck period in a trying time. So… in this scenario, there may be precedent for the appoint-then-resign option.

It has been quite common historically for Cabinet officers to carry on until their successors were appointed - though usually only for a matter of a few days.
 
Top