|
 |
| Taking part in the “Reassessing
the Carter Presidency: Seeking Lessons for the 21st Century” discussion
are (from left): moderator Jay Hakes, director of the Jimmy
Carter Library and Museum; Walter Mondale, former vice
president of the U.S.; Betty Glad, professor of political
science at the University of South Carolina; E. Stanly
Godbold, professor emeritus of history at Mississippi State
University; Erwin C. Hargrove, professor emeritus of political
science at Vanderbilt University; Burton I. Kaufman, professor
emeritus of history at Miami University of Ohio; and Leo
Ribuffo, professor of history at George Washington University.
(Photo by Peter Frey) |
‘No road maps’ |
| Mondale discusses forging
of a new vice presidency |
| By Mary Jessica Hammes |
| mhammes@uga.edu |
The conversation among panelists at
the first plenary roundtable discussion veered from the
groundbreaking role former Vice President Walter Mondale
and President Jimmy Carter forged for the modern vice presidency
to the consensus that Vice President Cheney has overstepped
his political boundaries—so much so that later that
day, one scholar said a backlash could lead to a regression
in vice-presidential responsibilities, making the position
little more than the ceremonial figurehead it once was.
Jay Hakes, director of the Jimmy Carter Library and Museum,
moderated the Jan. 19 morning roundtable discussion among
Mondale, Stuart Eizenstat and Richard Moe.
Mondale recounted how his mentor, former Vice President
Hubert Humphrey, had been insulted and ignored throughout
his term, saying that the office was like being in “a
black hole”—and yet still encouraged Mondale
to run.
“The modern vice presidency began Jan. 21, 1977,
when we took office, in the sense that for the first time,
the vice president. . . became (Carter’s) most trusted
adviser,” said Eizenstat, former chief domestic affairs
adviser.
Mondale was the first vice president to have an office
in the West Wing, gaining unprecedented access to the president.
Together, they created an 11-page memo outlining the concept
of the modern vice president.
And when Carter sent word that a request from the vice
president should be considered a request from the president
himself, that “sent a signal that this was a different
day,” said Moe, former chief of staff for Mondale.
“We were making this up,” Mondale said. “There
were no road maps.”
Mondale reiterated that he always valued Carter’s
trust and was always careful when speaking in public, which
led into the first tirade of the day against Cheney.
“I think Cheney has stepped way over the line,” he
said, adding that Cheney set up something like a parallel
national security council that operated on its own, “undermining
and bending the information the president should hear about.
“I think Cheney has been at the center about cooking
up all this farcical estimates” regarding national
risks and weapons of mass destruction, Mondale added. “I
don’t think that serves the president. The president
has to get the facts. . . the vice president should never
be in a position of pressuring the process on which the
president must depend.”
Later that day, during the panel “Carter and the
Modern American Vice Presidency,” participants cited
Cheney’s behavior as a hazard to the privileges Mondale
first enjoyed.
Cheney has abandoned the Mondale model of loyal subordinate
and adviser, and has become a driver of administration
policy, argued Lawrence R. Jacobs, the Walter F. and Joan
Mondale Chair of Political Science and director of the
Center for the Study of Politics and Governance in the
Humphrey Institute at the University of Minnesota.
“This is extremely serious,” he said. “It
is the vice president who is now acting as the president
in certain areas.”
Jacobs added that a backlash against Cheney may have future
administrations changing the vice presidential position
to limit its power, or else future presidents may pick
running mates more likely to be mild-mannered figureheads.
Moe, who was also a panelist in that session, disagreed: “I
see the Cheney experience as an aberration,” he said.
Panelist Joel K. Goldstein, Vincent C. Immel Professor
of Law at St. Louis University, said that the importance
of the vice presidential debates would ensure that presidential
hopefuls pick strong candidates rather than those better
fitted to simply ceremonial positions.
The Carter Presidency: Lessons for the 21st Century
Carter: United Staes should epitomize human dreams
‘No road maps’:
Mondale discusses forging of a new vice presidency
Panelists: U.S. needs to develop othe fuel sources
Foreign exchange
Former first lady sheds light on private thoughts behind
public face
More than 1,000 turn out for conversation with the Carters
during town hall meeting
Student panel discusses policy decisions with former president
Journalists discuss Carter’s
political rise. . . and fall
|
|
|
|
