The McCain qualifier

Meghan McCain, 26, whose father chose Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008, slammed Christine O’Donnell’s qualifications as a Senate candidate during an interview on ABC News’ “This Week” on Sunday, Oct. 15.

She proclaimed, “She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business. What that sends to my generation is, one day, you can just wake up and run for Senate, no matter how (much of a lack of experience) you have.”

I would certainly not vote for O’Donnell, but she still has the constitutional right to run for office. One day, Meghan will be able to wake up one day and run for the Senate - when she turns 30. She can now run for the House of Representatives (25 is the minimum age) and at 35 she can run for president.

She can even compete with her father for the Republican nomination…in 2020. Or she can run against dad in the general election as a Democrat or of another party.

When the delegates convened for the Constitutional Convention in 1787, they demanded very little of candidates for the presidency, the House and the Senate. They only need to meet certain age requirements and to live in their state on election day. Candidates for Congress must live in this country for so many years and, as we all know, a candidate for president must be born in this country.

This last requirement alienated Frank Costanza, George’s father on Seinfeld, who emigrated from Italy to Queens. Played by Jerry Stiller, Frank one day declares: “That’s why I could never become president. That’s also why, from an early age, I never had any interest in politics. They don’t want me, I don’t want them.”

Practically speaking, both qualified and unqualified candidates get nominated and elected to office. It is the right and responsibility of the people to decide who is suited for public office, and very often the public makes both exceptional and dreadful choices.

Most people would gamble their life savings on Democrat Chris Coons wiping out O’Donnell, a Republican, in the Delaware Senate election on Tuesday.

If Meghan wants to do this right, she might start a drive to amend the Constitution to add requirements for qualifications. Her father would be easily disqualified if the qualifications cover even temperament, courtesy to colleagues and…drum roll, please…judgment in their choice of vice presidential running mates.

We will never forget when her dad, Sen. John McCain, picked Palin to run for vice president in the presidential election. We also will never forget what McCain gave us.

The question of qualifications is intriguing. Some people would automatically demand an IQ test. More conservative citizens may well set a quota on graduates of Eastern Seaboard universities like Yale, Harvard and Princeton.

It is worth considering a set of qualifications not only for presidential candidates but also congressional hopefuls. It would be awfully hard to determine qualifications on which most Americans can concur.

However, three related issues come to mind which deserve consideration.

Recall when Hillary Clinton ran for senator of New York? Critics piled on that she was moving from Arkansas to New York as sort of a carpetbagger in reverse. She was criticized for running for the Senate almost immediately after moving into the state.

It is legitimate for anyone to wonder if she was taking advantage of New Yorkers to establish a political career. After all, Clinton must have understood that New Yorkers would be more accepting of her political views than Arkansans.

In West Virginia this year, Republican Senate candidate John Raese divides his time between West Virginia and Palm Beach. His children attend school in Palm Beach and his wife is registered to vote in Florida, not West Virginia.

Maybe he plans to divide his time between Palm Beach and Washington, D.C., if he is elected senator.

Residency requirements for congressional candidates should be expanded. Candidates must demonstrate a basic commitment to the state they want to represent or govern. That can only be guaranteed by enactment of strong law or amendment of the Constitution.

They should live in their adopted state for a specific number of years, probably between three to five years. Anyone living in his residence must be registered to vote in the state that s/he seeks to represent.

We should also consider whether a House member should live in the congressional district that s/he represents.

My representative, Democrat Bob Brady, lives in Philadelphia, but a different section. Brady has served his constituents well and he certainly understands the needs of the congressional district, which are primarily the same in the district where he lives.

In addition, there is always the potential that a member of Congress can be redistricted out of their district. S/he could be representing, and living in, a congressional district for decades and then the state legislature changes the district’s boundaries separate from the town or street where the congressperson lives.

It just seems peculiar that a member of Congress lives outside his/her district no matter how effective, qualified and experienced s/he might be.

The provision requiring presidential candidates can be safely overturned. Two governors who are barred from running for president can probably be trusted for loyalty to America just as much as any other politician here.

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm moved from Vancouver, Canada, to California when she was 4 years old and later moved to Michigan. Her husband is a Michigan native.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger moved from Austria to Los Angeles more than 40 years ago and has been an American citizen for more than 25 years. As a movie superstar, he has been a taxation bonanza and he contributes to charitable causes.

Besides, the United States is at peace with both Austria and Canada for the moment.

For those who want to assure that Schwarzenegger cannot be elected president, we can submit this provision: no mangled Austrian accents in the Oval Office.