The institution of the vice presidency is an institution that contradicts the whole
idea of democracy. I think that it is an institution that carries with it myths as
to the concept of continuity and the concept of preparation.

I have just come back from a long stay in Mexico to escape the rigors of my
home in upstate New York. They have a one-party government there. At the
end of the president's term, he selects the next president. This has gone on for
sixty years.

If we look at the vice presidency, we have essentially the same system in this
country. We have the elected president picking a potential president when he,
in effect, chooses his vice president. I find this system undemocratic. I would
submit that had not George Bush chosen Dan Quayle, the American people
would not have. This is carrying the idea of one man one vote to a ludicrous
extreme.

Continuity! Under the Twenty-fifth Amendment, Nelson Rockefeller was to
step in as vice president, after being selected by Ford in 1974. The king is dead,
long live the king! Well, there was a four-month hiatus while Nelson Rockefeller
was microscopically scrutinized. So, the idea of instant continuity doesn't exist
either. During the four-month hiatus, in effect, we did not have a vice president.

Now, I would like to make a few personal observations about the man whom
I served. Nelson Rockefeller came to the vice presidency, when finally confirmed,
in a crippled condition, as a result of the protracted examination of his qualifi-
cations and background. If you will recall, one of the most difficult obstacles
he encountered was the revelation that he had given substantial sums of money
to members of his staff during the years, in one instance as much as $625,000.
This investigation dragged on month after month. It struck me as being ironic.
Throughout American history, we have had politicians who have been in trouble
for being on the "take." Nelson Rockefeller was the first major, political figure
who got into trouble for being on the "give." My point is that he came to the
office essentially crippled. Professor Nelson aptly explained the damage that was
done during the drawn-out confirmation process. I will not repeat the point,
though it is a very valid point.

My most vivid personal recollection of Nelson Rockefeller as vice president,
while I served as his speechwriter, is of being on an aircraft with him and flying
to one of those funerals or earthquakes that he attended. The press was along
with us, and the reporters would be constantly questioning him. The trips were
one extended interview. It struck me how frustrated the man felt. He was well
versed in all public issues, both domestic and international. But what was of
interest to the press? "Is it not true, Mr. Vice President, that you selected this
office as a launch pad for your own presidential ambitions, perhaps in 1976?"
Rockefeller would answer: "That seems unlikely. In 1976, Jerry Ford will be

-187-