On Take Care Richard Primus addresses the possibility of an early American Presidential election:
The stability of many of our constitutional expectations is a key element in keeping the constitutional system workable. But it’s also true, and important to remember, that constitutional expectations sometimes change over time. In the first years of the Republic, before Americans had grown accustomed to a pattern of elections every four years and never more frequently, the idea that presidential elections could occur only in every fourth year wasn’t yet a dominant view. On the contrary, Congress in 1792 enacted a law providing for early elections in the event that the Presidency and Vice-Presidency became simultaneously vacant. What’s more, the new President chosen at the early election would serve a full four-year term, rather than simply filling out the remainder of the last President’s term. So in the contemplation of this early Congress, if a President and Vice-President elected in the year 1800 were killed or removed in 1803, a special election could be held in 1803, and the next regularly scheduled election would be in 1807.
The fact that Congress in 1792 deemed early elections appropriate doesn’t prove that such elections are constitutional. Maybe Congress passed an unconstitutional law. (James Madison, then serving in the House, seems to have thought the law was unconstitutional. Then again, Madison argued that lots of laws Congress passed over his objection in the 1790s were unconstitutional.[4]) Maybe—not for sure, but maybe—there are good structural arguments against early elections.
But it’s also plausible that Congress in 1792 made a constitutionally valid choice. As a matter of structure and of democratic theory, it’s not crazy to think that the best way to identify a President is to elect one. And nothing in the constitutional text clearly precludes, or even cuts heavily against, holding an early election. As noted before, Article II says that an Acting President serves “until…a President shall be elected,” not “until a president is elected at the next regularly scheduled election.” And to deepen a point made earlier, no constitutional text prevents a presidential election from being held less than four years after the previous one.
But he warns against such a move as it can lead to unfortunate gamesmanship in a hyper-partisan political environment.
I’d prefer to watch the GOP implode, kick out the extremists, and get back to the restrained compettion wherein we close ranks when an outside threat asserts itself – rather than writing extremely unfortunate letters and whining when the other side does something successful.
