Don't know what to title it.
Three questions;
1. Who is your state representative? Not Congress or Senate, but your statehouse rep? and,
2. How is a President elected? Most know by now that it is the Electoral College that makes the selection. Here is a nice take on it from back in the day;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyIFqf3XH24
So, not entirely accurate. As we found out in 2000. and,
3. How do we make sure what is happening doesn't happen again? (Assuming that there are future Presidential elections)
Our votes for President are technically meaningless (except NE and ME, whose State Constitutions spell out how the electors vote) That is right. A candidate could win 100% of the vote, (or 110% of the vote in Democrat controlled states) and the Electors could go the other way. Not likely, of course, but there is nothing to stop them from doing that.
In 2000, after going back and forth all night on FL, the networks finally went with what the votes had been all night. (of course when they called early for Algore, the panhandle precincts were still open, and may have suppressed what is traditionally a very conservative voting block) However, the votes consistently showed W winning, and finally, they changed and called for W. Algore did win the popular vote, nationally, Of course, Presidents aren't elected nationally, or even popularly for that matter. By the way. If Algore had won his home state of Tennessee, FL wouldn't have mattered.
The cries went out that we need to ditch the Electoral College. Thankfully nothing came of that. So why is it so important? Simple
Say you don't live on either coast. Maybe a small state, say Wyoming. Wyoming has 3 electoral votes for its half a million and change population (FYI, 3 is the fewest a state can have) California has 55 for its 38 million. If elections were decided simply by popular vote, would anyone stop in WY, or any state in the middle of the country? (Besides TX, IL etc.) Nope, they might as well not vote, in that instance. Every state counts in the current system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5aW08ivHU
Imagine, if you would, a world where we didn't spend billions on a Presidential election, with the two parties putting up candidates that the other side wanted to run against, and a Libertarian Candidate that has so compromised the LP values that he doesn't stand a chance with both being HORRIBLE candidates. Wouldn't you love that?
There are two ways to do that. One is federal, the other is each state.
The federal way. I have said before that the number of 435 in the House of Representatives is an arbitrary number, created when the US had a third of the population it has today. Advance legislation that would base representation on a per capita basis, say 1 Rep for every 100,000 people, or something like that. That would solve so many issues. Gerrymandering could be stopped. Representatives could more effectively represent their districts. AND it would be a lot harder for lobbyists to buy that many votes. That would be about 3,000 representatives, Wouldn't that be fun?
The state way. States determine how electors are selected, and as I said previously, how they vote in two states. They could also do away with a general election period. As the state legislatures currently select the electors, they would continue to do so, but now, there would be more emphasis on who your rep is in the statehouse. You would have to be more actively aware of who that person representing you is.
Going back to 2000. After finally conceding that FL was won by W, the Dems proceeded to try to get the electors to vote contrary to the results anyway. They didn't, but guess what? They COULD HAVE! They are not bound to vote for any candidate, no matter who won the state. (Except NE and ME), though to be fair, some states have penalties for electors that don't vote as they are supposed to. (never enforced, though)
I am sorry that it is so long, but I watched the debacle tonight, and am sorry that I did. Haven't watched election coverage in months, choosing to read most of my news, on a variety of sites.
1. Who is your state representative? Not Congress or Senate, but your statehouse rep? and,
2. How is a President elected? Most know by now that it is the Electoral College that makes the selection. Here is a nice take on it from back in the day;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyIFqf3XH24
So, not entirely accurate. As we found out in 2000. and,
3. How do we make sure what is happening doesn't happen again? (Assuming that there are future Presidential elections)
Our votes for President are technically meaningless (except NE and ME, whose State Constitutions spell out how the electors vote) That is right. A candidate could win 100% of the vote, (or 110% of the vote in Democrat controlled states) and the Electors could go the other way. Not likely, of course, but there is nothing to stop them from doing that.
In 2000, after going back and forth all night on FL, the networks finally went with what the votes had been all night. (of course when they called early for Algore, the panhandle precincts were still open, and may have suppressed what is traditionally a very conservative voting block) However, the votes consistently showed W winning, and finally, they changed and called for W. Algore did win the popular vote, nationally, Of course, Presidents aren't elected nationally, or even popularly for that matter. By the way. If Algore had won his home state of Tennessee, FL wouldn't have mattered.
The cries went out that we need to ditch the Electoral College. Thankfully nothing came of that. So why is it so important? Simple
Say you don't live on either coast. Maybe a small state, say Wyoming. Wyoming has 3 electoral votes for its half a million and change population (FYI, 3 is the fewest a state can have) California has 55 for its 38 million. If elections were decided simply by popular vote, would anyone stop in WY, or any state in the middle of the country? (Besides TX, IL etc.) Nope, they might as well not vote, in that instance. Every state counts in the current system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5aW08ivHU
Imagine, if you would, a world where we didn't spend billions on a Presidential election, with the two parties putting up candidates that the other side wanted to run against, and a Libertarian Candidate that has so compromised the LP values that he doesn't stand a chance with both being HORRIBLE candidates. Wouldn't you love that?
There are two ways to do that. One is federal, the other is each state.
The federal way. I have said before that the number of 435 in the House of Representatives is an arbitrary number, created when the US had a third of the population it has today. Advance legislation that would base representation on a per capita basis, say 1 Rep for every 100,000 people, or something like that. That would solve so many issues. Gerrymandering could be stopped. Representatives could more effectively represent their districts. AND it would be a lot harder for lobbyists to buy that many votes. That would be about 3,000 representatives, Wouldn't that be fun?
The state way. States determine how electors are selected, and as I said previously, how they vote in two states. They could also do away with a general election period. As the state legislatures currently select the electors, they would continue to do so, but now, there would be more emphasis on who your rep is in the statehouse. You would have to be more actively aware of who that person representing you is.
Going back to 2000. After finally conceding that FL was won by W, the Dems proceeded to try to get the electors to vote contrary to the results anyway. They didn't, but guess what? They COULD HAVE! They are not bound to vote for any candidate, no matter who won the state. (Except NE and ME), though to be fair, some states have penalties for electors that don't vote as they are supposed to. (never enforced, though)
I am sorry that it is so long, but I watched the debacle tonight, and am sorry that I did. Haven't watched election coverage in months, choosing to read most of my news, on a variety of sites.
Comments
Post a Comment