VIEWPOINTS: Trump’s Insurance Policy? People should start thinking seriously about what might happen between now and January 20, 2029.

Originally published by The Berkshireedge can be found here

Written by Eugene R. Fidell

April 6, 2026

In normal times, there would be every reason to expect that President Trump will continue to occupy the nation’s highest office until noon on January 20, 2029. That is a few months shy of three years from now. Given his age, debilitation, and increasingly aberrant behavior on a host of issues, however, there is reason to doubt whether he will be fit to hold office until then. Even otherwise devoted members of his own party have begun to wonder about him. As the conversation begins, it’s worth recalling the legal framework.

Since 1967, removal of a president for disability has been governed by section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. It provides:

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.

Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

What leaps out is the fact that removal for disability cannot occur without the written support of the vice president and a majority of the cabinet, all of whom will have been selected by the very president whose removal is at issue. And even then, a president may attempt to thwart removal by resisting and will succeed in holding onto his job unless both houses of Congress find him unable to perform his functions by two-thirds vote. Since an incumbent president is likely to resist removal, he will continue in office unless the evidence of disability is clear and senators and representatives discharge their functions based on the evidence rather than other considerations.

Thus, in addition to the natural tendency of the vice president and cabinet members, all of whom owe their positions to the president, the president stands an all-but-perfect chance of remaining in office barring death, resignation, or senatorial removal following impeachment. There has been only one presidential resignation – that of President Nixon in 1974 – and while three presidents have been impeached (once each for Andrew Johnson and Clinton and two for Trump), none has been removed following impeachment.

It follows that, barring death or a Nixonian resignation under pressure of an impending impeachment-and-removal, President Trump will remain in office unless he is found to have committed high crimes and misdemeanors since taking office a second time. It is not hard to think of actions that meet that amorphous test, such as dismantling government departments and agencies created by Congress, removing officials without cause, violating the Anti-Deficiency Act, abusing the pardon power, failing to faithfully execute the laws in a host of ways, and engaging in wars neither authorized by Congress nor in response to imminent or actual foreign invasion, and directing or permitting subordinates to direct military operations in ways that constitute murder (thinking here of the boat strikes).

If there exists a colorable-or-better case for impeachment-and-removal, are there reasons Representatives and Senators might decide that the country was better off trying to live through another several years with him in power than opening what might be a Pandora’s box by installing Vice President Vance in his place. Put another way, is Vance Trump’s insurance policy?

While there are ample reasons to not want Vance any nearer the levers of power than he already is, the choice may be a close one, and a case can be made that Trump has proven himself to be so demonstrably unfit that even Vance would be an improvement. What are the pertinent considerations?

First, it seems highly unlikely that Vance would inherit the political base whose support has made the second Trump administration possible. Some erosion may be inevitable, but the fissures that have already become apparent in that base over matters such as the Iranian War, the Epstein files, the protracted partial government shutdown, and widespread dismay over ICE operations, as well as poor Republican results in recent elections, suggest that the bloom may soon be off the rose even for the Trump base, if it has not already wilted.

Related to this is the fear factor. President Trump has repeatedly threatened to “primary” legislators who failed to support his initiatives and has largely succeeded in keeping Republican elected officials in formation through such threats. It is unlikely that those officials will be equally susceptible to similar threats from a President Vance. We know Trump and his ability to stir up a crowd; Vance is no Trump.

If Vance were to succeed to the presidency, he would face, in addition to a restive Congress (even if the Republicans retain control of one or both Houses), some number of politicians who will challenge him for the Republican nomination in 2028. He can hardly be counted out, especially given his deep-pocketed financial backers, and possibly reaping the benefit of having created some daylight between himself and Trump on the war. But his shortcomings as a candidate, extreme views, and past miscues will detract from what might otherwise be the advantages of incumbency in Republican primaries, not to mention in a general election in which Democrats will likely field an attractive and more broadly acceptable ticket unburdened by links to what is likely to be, in the end, a discredited and unpopular Trump-Vance administration.

It’s worth recalling that if Vance were to become president before the expiration of Trump’s term, he would need the support of a majority of both houses to fill the resulting vice-presidential vacancy under Section 2 of the 25th Amendment. Even if the Democrats come to control only the House after the midterms, why would they help install a Vance nominee? After all, if they kept the position vacant, that would put a Democratic speaker next in line to the presidency. Or they might demand that Vance nominate someone who would lack a political future. Or – be still, my heart – they might demand that he nominate a Democrat, producing a fusion Executive Branch. It would be nice to be able to say that stranger things have happened, but that wouldn’t be true unless you count the proceedings that at the last minute resolved the disputed election of 1876.

Finally, while Trump cannot remove Vance, he could make his official life miserable and hobble his effort to inherit Trump’s mantle in the competition for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination. For example, what if Trump announces that the Vances need to quit their official residence at the Naval observatory because Trump claims renovations are urgently needed? Trump could withdraw Vance’s Executive Branch responsibilities (and perks). He could even sponsor an impeachment effort if Vance were to stake out an independent position on, for example, the current war with Iran. If Vance were removed following impeachment, of course, Trump could attempt to fill the resulting vacancy, but as a second-term president without working control over both Houses, the vacancy would likely not be filled, leaving whoever is Speaker of the House as first in the line of succession.

People should start thinking seriously about what might happen between now and January 20, 2029. Vance stands a modest but better than remote chance of ascending to the top office. If he does, will that be worse or better for the country than the shambolic status quo? Unless it seems that Vance would be materially worse than the incumbent, it would be rash of Trump to think of him as his insurance policy.