Tags: electoral college | majoritarian | mob rule

Why We Have to Jealously Safeguard the Electoral College

Why We Have to Jealously Safeguard the Electoral College
(Lznogood/Dreamstime.com)

By
Friday, 22 March 2019 12:11 PM Current | Bio | Archive

New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie joined a throng of Democratic presidential hopefuls Thursday in calling for an end to the Electoral College.

Quoting the late author James A. Michener, who once wrote that the Electoral College was a “time bomb lodged near the heart of the nation,” Bouie concluded, “It still is.”

But Bouie, Michener, and the Democrats are all dead wrong. If we scrap the Electoral College, we would end the last vestige of that which identifies the United States as a republic that refuses to submit to the mob rule of pure democracy.

More than that, discarding the Electoral College is the act that would create the ticking time bomb.

While Democrats use the 2016 presidential election as an example to ditch the method we use to elect presidents, it provides an even greater example why it should remain.

Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton took the popular vote by 2,868,686 votes, yet she lost the race by 77 electoral votes. Unfair, Democrats say, and at first blush that appears accurate — until you look at California.

All of Clinton’s gains — and then some — were made in California. Clinton surpassed Trump by 4,269,978 votes in the Golden State. Then she actually cut that overwhelming lead by more than 1.4 million votes among the other 49 states.

If presidents were elected by a pure popular vote, the electorate might put up with that scenario once or twice, but eventually they’d revolt. In Michener’s words, it would create a “time bomb lodged near the heart of the nation” — at the epicenter of the flyover country that candidates and elections would ignore in that case.

Like France, which is essentially ruled by Paris, its population center, the United States would be ruled by California, and California’s politics that have transformed that once-beautiful state into a drug-addled, disease-ridden trash heap of human waste.

Less populous but economically more important states like Iowa and Nebraska in the farm belt, Oklahoma and Louisiana in the energy belt, and Michigan and Ohio in the rust belt, have no interest in being run by California — and for good reason.

The United States already took one step in the wrong direction a century ago. The Constitution, as it was written, provided that senators should be elected by their state’s legislature. The framers believed that the Senate, being the deliberative body of Congress, should consist of individuals whose priority was the interests of their home state.

But beginning in the 1890s, the House of Representatives sought a constitutional amendment to elect senators by a direct popular vote. For years the Senate refused to even consider the measure.

The 17th Amendment was finally approved by both chambers in 1912, and was ratified by a sufficient number of states a year later, and with it, the United States lost something that made its government unique — something that prevented mob rule.

Given that history, one would assume that an amendment abolishing the Electoral College would take even greater effort and more time — and one would be dead wrong.

An effort is already afoot — not to amend the Constitution, but to bypass it.

Colorado joined 12 other states and the District of Columbia this year to pass and sign into law a blood pact that would ignore its voters and cast its electoral votes with whichever candidate wins the popular vote. Each state’s law would go into effect when a sufficient number of states representing at least 270 electoral votes pass similar laws.

In effect, each of those states have betrayed its voters. They told their constituents that their vote doesn’t count. California voters count, but those in Colorado don’t.

At the moment, the coalition of states is only 89 electoral votes shy of the magic 270.

If Democrats were eager to trash the Electoral College before, they may be in a panic to do so after the release of the results of 12 models conducted by Moody’s Analytics Thursday.

Moody’s has a strong track record of predicting presidential winners, and it made a startling prediction this time.

Despite multiple investigations and an upside-down approval rating, Moody’s predicted that if the election were held today, President Donald Trump would once again come out the victor — and in a landslide.

But in order to assure that happens, the United States has to retain that which makes it unique — the Electoral College.

Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and has been a frequent contributor to BizPac Review and Liberty Unyielding. He’s also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and an enthusiastic Second Amendment supporter, who can often be found honing his skills at the range. To read more of his reports - Click Here.

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
MichaelDorstewitz
New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie joined a throng of Democratic presidential hopefuls Thursday in calling for an end to the Electoral College.
electoral college, majoritarian, mob rule
779
2019-11-22
Friday, 22 March 2019 12:11 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved