Did you know that the official 2016 presidential election
did not happen on November 8th; that Donald Trump hasn’t been
elected yet and might not be; that the real election happens on Monday December
19th; that the result is up to only 538 people; and that Hillary Clinton
might still become our next President?
Now, I’m not going to panic about this situation. I’m
confident that Trump will be elected on Monday by more than the required 270 electoral
votes. But I’m afraid that someday, unless it is fixed, our constitutional Electoral
College procedure could conceivably turn into an electoral horror picture show
which might lead to another civil war.
Even now certain elements in the Democrat Party are fervently
attempting to influence the 538 electors to deprive Trump of the presidency and
give it to Hillary Clinton. If they are successful that would result in a
constitutional crisis and violence in the streets.
You see, right now there are no federal constitutional
provisions for a general presidential election like the one we had on November
8th. That’s why, even though
he handily won that election, he hasn’t officially been elected yet. Article 2 and
the 12th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution set forth the official
procedure for electing the President and Vice President.
Art 2.1 The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the
United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four
Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be
elected, as follows:
Art 2.2 Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof
may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and
Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress…
So, our presidents are not officially chosen by the
people in a general election, but by 538 Electors chosen by the legislators of
each of the 50 states. Each individual state determines how their Electors are
chosen. The states are not required to choose Electors based on the results of
any general election. However, most states have a winner-take-all system in
which the candidate with the most votes in the state general election gets all
the electoral votes and the Electors are chosen by the winning candidate’s
political party.
It is generally understood by the voters and the Electors
themselves that they are merely the representative stand-ins for the candidates
and are expected to cast their Electoral College ballots for the President and
Vice President who appeared on the ballot.
But sometimes electors go rouge and refuse to vote for
the designated candidate. Many states have laws requiring electors to toe the
line but the constitutionality of such laws is presently uncertain.
This leaves a window wide open for the kind electoral
mischief which could lead to constitutional chaos.
The Twelfth Amendment amended Art 2.3 of the Constitution. It sets forth the voting procedure the Electors
are to follow in each state to elect the President and Vice President, and to
transmit their results to the President of the U.S. Senate. The problem is that
there is no federal constitutional requirement that the Elector vote for the
candidate who received the most votes in the state’s general election. So each
Elector can theoretically vote for whoever he or she desires.
The President of the
U.S. Senate shall, on January 6, 2016, in the presence of the Senate and U.S. House
of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be
counted. If no candidate has a majority then the U.S. House of Representatives
chooses the President by vote from among the list of candidates; a
representative from each state having one vote. The Vice President is chosen in
similar fashion.
I support the
Electoral College as mandated by our federal Constitution; however, I think
that the provisions should be amended once again to specify clearly and
unambiguously that each Elector is bound to vote for the candidate who received
the most popular votes in his or her states general election.
I want to foreclose
any possibility in the future of an Electoral horror picture show.
The electoral college the way it is today makes no sense. Why not just apportion the electoral college votes the way it is now, so that the electors have no choice? Then do away with the electoral college because the way it is today it is only window dressing, if the electors must apportion their votes anyway. There is something wrong with a system when the candidate that gets about 3,000,000 more votes still loses.
ReplyDeleteNow, I dislike Hillary with a passion, but I think in the long run her loss with so many more votes than Trump will make future election of Republicans to the presidency more difficult.
Trump is no friend of liberty, so when (hopefully, if) Trump does something authoritarian, it is more likely to be rubber stamped than if Hillary had been checked by a Republican Congress.
The purpose of the EC is to prevent cities from dominating elections. There is a better way. Allocate Electoral votes district-by-district. Winner-take-all is the problem, not the EC.
ReplyDelete