Stranger things have happened than Indiana Gov. Mike Pence winning the Republican nomination for president in 2016.
Eight years ago, at a similar point in the 2008 race, the election of Barack Obama may have seemed even more unlikely.
One gambling site ranks Pence 18th among the likely Republican candidates.
But State Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, is taking Pence’s chances seriously. Just in case Pence surges to the top of the Republican heap, Delph introduced a bill that would change Indiana law, allowing Pence to run for president and for re-election as governor at the same time in 2016.
By one standard, Delph’s idea seems fair. In the 1980s, the Indiana Legislature made it legal to run for two offices at once in a special situation. Indiana allows a candidate to run for the U.S. House of Representatives or Senate at the same time as running for U.S. vice president.
Legislators made that change to accommodate U.S. Rep. Lee Hamilton and U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, who were being mentioned as possible candidates for vice president in 1988.
If it’s legal to run for vice president and another office, why not add president to the list? If it’s OK to run for Congress and a higher office at the same time, why wouldn’t it work for governor or another state office?
In fact, Delph’s bill does apply to state legislators as well as the governor. It would allow legislators to run for Congress while running for re-election to their legislative seats at the same time.
Leaders of the state House of Representatives and state Senate both oppose Delph’s bill, making it likely that the bill will die in a legislative committee.
But what makes it such a bad idea that it needs to be squelched without discussion?
Aside from the current exception for vice president, Indiana law does not allow a candidate to run for two offices at once.
One obvious problem is the disruption that would occur if a candidate won both offices. That would leave the lesser office vacant. A replacement would have to be chosen by the process laid out in state law. That usually involves a political party’s officials picking the replacement. In the case of governor, the lieutenant governor would become the new governor.
Although a lieutenant governor candidate appears on the election ballot, the nominee is chosen in a party convention — not a primary election. Plus, the qualifications of the lieutenant governor candidates are not the main consideration of voters making their choices for governor.
In any case, if a candidate won two offices, the lesser office would be filled from the start by someone who was not elected to that office by the voters.
Another problem with Delph’s idea is that it unfairly favors incumbents. Only someone already holding an office could take advantage of the proposed law. A person who does not hold a state office could not run for two offices at once.
On the plus side, Delph argues that it would be good for Indiana to have a Hoosier running for president, and we should eliminate obstacles.
Any candidate taking advantage of Delph’s plan would run the risk of losing both offices because of voter resentment or lack of time to campaign effectively in two races. But should taking that risk be a candidate’s choice, or should it remain illegal?
We believe the best idea is to limit a candidate to only one office at a time. Making an exception for vice president probably was a bad idea, and we ought to consider repealing it — not adding more exceptions.
Our bigger worry is that if Pence does make a serious run for president, his eye will be on Washington, not Indianapolis, for a year or longer.
We hope Pence will keep his priorities focused on what’s best for Indiana — not what might make him appealing to national voters or financial backers.
The Vincennes Sun-Commercial said it very well in a recent editorial: “Hoosiers deserve a candidate whose top priority is their state, whose loyalty isn’t divided, whose focus is here at home, who cares more about the Wabash than the Potomac.”