The 2024 presidential election is shaping up – at least for now – to be a battle of men hovering close on either side of 80 years of age, and while that has sparked discussion about their mental and physical capacity to serve, a political analyst from the Brookings Institution has taken the time to explore what would happen if a candidate were to die before taking office.
According to Elaine Kamarck of the esteemed D.C. think tank, there are a number of potential scenarios at play that should be taken into consideration as the electorate approaches a choice between two candidates who, simply by virtue of their chronological ages, do run the risk of requiring replacement.
While nobody – on either side of the aisle – should wish serious illness or death upon one of the current presidential front runners, the fact remains that, given the advanced ages of both Joe Biden and Donald Trump, it is necessary to plan for any and all contingencies.
As such, Kamarck has taken it upon herself to examine a range of scenarios – and potential outcomes – if incapacitation or mortality befalls either a candidate or the pre-inauguration winner of the November election.
The author points out that on Inauguration Day 2025, Trump is set to be 78 years old, and Biden would be 82, and as such, it is wise to familiarize the electorate about how one of the above situations would play out.
Kamarck makes clear at the outset that the ramifications of death or incapacity of one a candidate or a winner would depend in large part on precisely when the unforeseen event took place.
If one of the two men had suffered a debilitating event prior to the start of 2024, there would likely would have been a mad scramble among alternative candidates in each party to meet the various filing deadlines set by individual states, but no such eventuality emerged, paving the way for Kamarck's consideration of the subsequent six months.
According to Kamarck, should misfortune befall one of the top candidates between now and mid-June, there are certain states likely to adjust their primary dates and/or filing deadlines to allow the entry of other candidates.
Ballots marked “uncommitted” or those that include the names of write-in candidates could also fill the void where hopefuls were unable to meet ballot filing deadlines.
Were death or incapacitation to occur between mid-June and the Wednesday evening of the parties' respective conventions, a rather more old-fashioned process of a state-by-state polling process would be used to select an alternative for the top of the tickets.
Death or incapacity prior to Election Day but after the conventions would yield party-dependent results, according to Kamarck, with the Republican National Committee being empowered to select a replacement in the same way the Democratic National Committee would be.
If the winner of the presidential election were to suffer a debilitating incapacity or death prior to inauguration, constitutional provisions dictate the manner in which a successor would be chosen, depending on whether the triggering event took place before or after the electoral college was set to meet.
In a case where the presidential winner became unable to serve after the meeting of the electoral college but prior to inauguration, the vice president designee would assume office in his or her stead.
While the detailed considerations outlined by Kamarck may seem overly arcane and academic to some, the fact that the current leading candidates for the Oval Office are both subjects of skepticism and concern directly related to age, it behooves all voters to understand the landscape in case the unexpected occurs.
