Is It Time to Trash the Electoral College?

Once again in America, we have a presidential election outcome that places the winner of the election in office even though they failed to win the popular vote. It's not the first time but many in America are protesting in the streets for it to be the last.

Why does the United Sates use the Electoral College and not the popular vote to decide the presidency? What is the Electoral College?

Yes, people are very upset that Donald Trump won the election based on the electoral college. Democrats still have the stinging memory of Bush v Gore in 2000. Gore conceded a day after an exhaustive manual recount in the state of Florida was halted by the United States Supreme Court. 

The decision by the court resulted in Bush getting the state's 25 electoral votes which put Bush over the 270-electoral vote threshold to win the White House. Now, let's be clear the current Clinton v Trump election does not have the same issues as Gore v Bush but it does share one thing the winner of the popular vote lost. The Supreme Court did not decide the outcome.

There weren't any hanging chads to ponder over but the outcome put this year's election results in the highly unusual category. This year's election results marks only the fifth time a president received the keys to the White House without winning the popular vote. [See Source]

Donald Trump won this election fair and square based on the Electoral College system a much maligned and complex system for choosing the presidency. Many are protesting in the streets right now because of this system and many ask why isn't a simple vote count of the popular vote used?

There is a misconception that when Americans go to the polls to vote for a presidential candidate they are voting for that person in the present Clinton or Trump. In fact, this is wrong. They [American Voter] are casting their vote for a group of electors who then vote for the president.

Another misnomer about presidential voting is that the president is elected once the public vote totals are tabulated. This may come as a shock to some but ever since they stopped Civics classes in High School people are quite illiterate when it comes to politics in this country. This tabulation is called the popular vote.

Because of these misinterpretations, people fail to understand or realize that we do not technically vote for the president, but rather for which Electoral College representative will get to vote for president. The president isn't officially elected until January. Soon after the election, the current Vice-President Joe Biden will call for open voting during a joint session of Congress. During this session, the electoral votes will be counted and submitted.

Who Are These Electors and How Are They Chosen?

There are two federal laws on the books that appertain to who can be an elector. The first comes straight from the Constitution of The United States. Article II states: 

"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: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector."

The second is a provision buried deep in the 14th amendment that was a direct result of the Civil War which states:

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." 

Other than these two restrictions anyone can be an elector. The political parties have much to say about who becomes an elector. Also, each state legislature determines its own method of selection. To simplify, each state nominates an elector who has a history of being loyal to their respective parties.

Here is where it [Electoral College] gets confusing and in many people's view undemocratic. The number of electors is equal to the number of electoral votes each state is allotted. In turn, this number is generally equal to the number of senators [two per state] and the number of representatives [based on population]. On election day, whichever political party’s candidate receives the most popular votes that party's chosen electors get to vote for the president in that respective state. One of the most confusing and labyrinthine aspects of the Electoral College is there are no federal laws or Constitutional provisions that require electors to cast their vote based on the state's popular vote results. However, most states have put in place laws that require electors to do so.

Has the Electoral College become an Antiquated System?

Initially, the Electoral College was established because without it candidates would focus their time on the big population centers, therefore, they would have the attention of the voters in these population areas and the vast rural areas of the country would be ignored. Essentially, what this meant was national elections would be nothing more than elections between big cities. So, the founders established the Electoral College and later the primary system as a stopgap. But, what did that lead to? It leads to big states being ignored and basically just flipped the whole process around. What this has led to is, in fact, small rural states having a disproportionate power and attention paid to them.

Based on this writer's research and in my view the Electoral College system must go. We have reached a time in our nation where the popular vote should determine the winner of any election not just the presidency. It's not only the simplest way it's the most democratic. The main reason it's unlikely to change no matter the level of protest it would take a constitutional amendment to change the rules and to do so would require three-fourths of the states to ratify it. This ratification is unlikely because more than a quarter of the states would be against it because they are small states and benefit from the Electoral College system.

One of this writer's all-time favorite political shows to this day is C-SPAN’S Washington Journal here is a very good debate for and against the Electoral College.

As we know today the very scenarios these gentlemen were talking about in 2009 came to past this 2016 election cycle. 

Some closing bullet points that we pose are a current modern day problem with the Electoral College.

• It creates the possibility for the loser of the popular vote to win the electoral vote. 
• It distorts the presidential campaign, by incentivizing the parties to write off the more than 40 states (plus the District of Columbia) that they know they either can’t win or can’t lose. 
• The Electoral College system further distorts the presidential campaign by causing the candidates to grant extra weight to the parochial needs of the swing states.
• It distorts governance.
• The Electoral College system further distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy.
• The Electoral College creates the possibility of a 269-269 tie vote, and in almost every recent election there has been a relatively credible scenario for such an outcome.
• Although our system, as evolved, makes it very hard for third parties to win elections and almost impossible for a third party to win the presidency.
• In case of a tie, or if no candidate receives a majority of all electoral votes cast for president, the choice of president is thrown in the House of Representatives but  the election is conducted on a one-state one-vote basis.
• For a deeper analyst of our bullet points, you can review our source here.

It Starts Here In The House Of Public Discourse

America is an ongoing experiment and we are still striving to form a more perfect union. But the arguments and debates of the 21st century began centuries ago in Virginia’s Colonial Capital—Williamsburg. George Washington is embarking on a campaign to reintroduce himself to his country and to remind his fellow citizens of the sacred duty to choose their own leaders. It starts here. It starts with your participation, your debate, and your vote.

Authoritarianism + Racism + Fascism =The Tea Party

Mussolini

If you are behind the curve on just what Authoritarianism is please see Leave Your Authoritarianism At The Church House Please! As we begin the 2016 Presidential Election in earnest knowing who your constituents are is vital and even more important where they came from, in short, their history. In asking myself this question with the task of answering it properly my study was quickly directed to a term Mussolini American Republicans. Our research here in the HOPD quickly found that the Tea Party mindset is nothing new and has origins dating back to Mussolini. There was an attempt to set up a fascist dictatorship in America. The upshot of the movement was to create an organization with a goal of reaching some 500,000 men. Their purpose was clear and simple. Intimidate the government. A Congressional committee was formed on the matter. Subsequently evidence found a plot to overthrow FDR.  This behavior is very much akin to the growing Secession Movement in America today coming primarily from the Tea Party crowd.[See Article] 

How fascists plotted to overthrow the US Government

Then low and behold the name Prescott Bush  materializes. That's right the original Bush traitor. The Daddy and Granddaddy to the modern day, Bush family who all but ruin this country and drove into the ditch. Prescott Bush was a Nazi traitor to this country and like his grandson Bush, Jr should have been tried for treason. [See Source] 

In 1932, Mussolini stated:

" We are absolutely opposed to Liberalism." 

Just like the Tea Party of today the Mussolini American 

Republicans felt that Egalitarianism was an absurd political lie.

What is Egalitarianism? 

Just like the Tea Party of today the Mussolini American Republicans felt that Egalitarianism was an absurd political lie. The moocher comments we hear today from the Tea Party and the go " fend for yourself," mantra of the Libertarians are shockingly similar to the outcry's of the Mussolini American Republicans. They claimed FDR's New Deal would lead to collective irresponsibility. Not unlike today's Tea Party, they claimed the fertile and beneficent inequality of men cannot be leveled by suffrage. 

These Are Not Lincoln Republicans!

Our research in the House of Public Discourse has concluded that the modern-day Tea Party is nothing more than a fascist movement motivated by racism and enabled by Authoritarianism. With the 2008 election rendering America, the first person of color to the White House created the spark to ignite this reemergence of blatant Fascism in America. The movement has been spearheaded by the American Christian Right. See the right-wing authoritarian follower is easily brainwashed. The late Jerry Falwell, Pat Roberston, and John Hagee have been some of the biggest perpetrators with a list growing daily. TV Pastors see money in Fascism, Racism, and Authoritarianism. They are obvious power and control seekers.  

Buy Our Source Here

Another similarity, just like the Mussolini American Republicans hated FDR the same can be said of the Tea Party towards Barack Obama. 

The Tea Party tries to sell their organization as a cross-section of America. They allege they are a nonpartisan mix of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. This is absurd. Our research in the HOPD clearly reveals that the Tea Party is primarily made up of Right-Wing Authoritarian Followers who make up the ranks of the Republican Social Conservative faction within the party. The Religious Right. According to a study conducted on the issue found that most of the Tea Party followers suffer from " The Hitler Syndrome." [See Source]

BREITBART AND THE TEA PARTY HITLER SYNDROME

The study points out over a dozen traits found in Tea Party members were consistent with Authoritarianism. These evaluation were based on the answers given by those participating in the study. All of these answers were a clear indication that a vast majority of Tea Party members suffer from "The Hitler Syndrome." 

THE RELIGIOUS-REICH AND RIGHT WING DEATH SQUADS

Russ Limbaugh stated on a national radio station he wanted the right-wing death squads to come to America. What appalls this writer is our tax dollars funded these death squads? The American Republican Right has sponsored one of the most bazaars morally reprehensible acts ever in the history of man that is only rivaled by today's Isis. All this killing was done in the name of "GOD." Under Ronald Reagan, he merged the CIA operation with the " Vatican." In Reagan's zeal to bring down Communism, he empowered several former Nazis in Eastern Europe. Our study found that many of these operatives were Holocaust deniers. Moderate and Liberal Priest who opposed the Nazis doctrine were removed from power. Under G.W. Bush, the Bill of Rights was annulled. This annulment granted the now merged CIA and Vatican the right to spy on any American for any reason. What very few Americans realize is that our U. S. Supreme Court was given over to the Vatican.

In England, Bush's counterpart Tony Blair restored the Church of England to the Vatican and the E.U, was brought under the control of the Vatican. 

All of this was by design a plan and now the last piece of the puzzle. This   activity was said to prove GOD's forgiveness. And, while Rome's GOD had plenty of forgiveness for Nazis and pedophiles it strangely couldn't find any for the Nazis resistors in the Church. 

Rev Jay Smith

A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."[See Source] It became apparent that no matter what President Obama does the extreme racist  Religious Right Nazis were going to criticize, obstruct, and commit sedition in this writers view. Here in the recent, we can add the 47 senators letter to Iran which constitutes treason under the Logan Act. The bottom-line is we have hoards of people walking around who call themselves Tea Party Patriots who are nothing more nothing less than brainwashed Nazis repackaged as American Patriots. 

Discourse Unplugged with Johnny Hill

STOP THE MADNESS!!!!!

From House Member DeAnn Padelo

We The People Are Paying For Our Peril!

In America, we have seen a materialization  of cops meeting the military. Once upon a time, cops and the military had very different missions. It was widely held to conflate the two wasn't good for a free society. What we have seen happen over the last generation or so, beginning with the " War on Drugs,"  is the military selling weapons to police, including, tanks, armor-coated vehicles, helicopters, guns, and other heavy armaments.....even the old bayonet!  One of the first results of this practice was for police agencies across the country, big and small,  to form S.W.A.T like teams within the police force.

In fact, the number of S.W.A.T teams across the country has risen dramatically. It's this drastic rise that has Americans in every corner of the country in protest mode. Pencil in the NSA and America has a very serious problem. What's totally unfair and evil is " We The People" are paying for our peril with our hard earned tax dollars, .[Buy Source Below]

RISE IN S.W.A.T. RAIDS  ANNUAL FIGURES.

1970-----2005

• 1970's---Few Hundred
• 1980's[Early]---3000
• 2005---50,000

Source: Peter Kraska Easten Kentucky University

Before the Reagan " War on Drugs,"   most towns with 25K individuals who had S.W.A.T teams was about 15% but today that has risen to well over 80%.  What we see now is a domino effect from the 'Military Industrial Complex.' For example, we see Drones being used by police now. This development is problematic. America does not need a militarized police force! The recent events all over the country exhibiting police overkill have enlightened many Americans and motivated them to the point of national protests.

The Root of the Problem?  Under the Justice Department's COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services) program, 629 of the 800 police jobs funded for the next three years – all the newly hired officers – must go to veterans who served at least 180 days' active duty since 9/11. This is the first time the 18-year-old COPS program has required cities and counties seeking grants to hire veterans exclusively.[See Source] Why is this a problem one might ask?  Thousands of Vets are getting ' less than honorable' discharges because they have (PTSD). How many of our Vets turned Cop suffer from this disorder in some capacity that, for a variety of reasons have slipped through the cracks?[See Article]

What is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder?[PTSD]

According to a CNN report, the suicide rate among Veterans could be as high as 22 a day. That equates to a suicide every 65 minutes. The point here is that Veterans of wars have known mental issues. How many of these psychological issues have been masked by Vets looking for work in the civilian workplace? How many of these former soldiers turned cop have gone undiagnosed?  What has come to reality is that America has loose cannons running around in a uniform with a gun and, based on the history of police related shootings and the conviction rate thereof, a ' licence to kill' unarmed American citizens with no recompense. This civil injustice has caused millions of Americans to become larrikin, which in turn creates trigger happy police who shoot first and ask questions later.

This Is Not A War, It's a 12 year old kid!!

Earlier this year, the House of Public Discourse also found evidence of our nation's military brainwashing and encouraging our impressionable young soldiers to become " Holy Warriors."  Killing in the name of God was posh in the Dark Ages; are we returning to the Dark Ages in America? Is there a crusade against certain segments of our society?  If these questions seem far-fetched, why are our nation's police forces buying military gear at record levels at the expense of the tax- payer?

WE THE PEOPLE ARE PAYING FOR OUR PERIL!

There are lots of things going on here concerning the militarization of America's police forces. What we don't know is important. What's even more important is why we don't know it. This ambiguity is one reason, in the House view, the Ferguson community reacted in the way they did. For instance, the Ferguson Police Dept. has had cameras their officers could wear. Their cruisers have dash cameras installed. For whatever reason, they decided not to use them. Why? If they did use these devices as they were intended, we would know what transpired on that day Darren Wilson shot an unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown dead. We would know a lot more as to who was at fault. In fact, these devices could have justified the action of officer Wilson. In reality, what we got was a grand jury process run amuck.[See Article]

Is America In A State Of Emergency?

What has added fuel to the fire is how America's 

police forces have reacted towards this civil-

disobedience. For example, who can forget the 

nonchalant press conference held by St. Louis County 

Police Chief Jon Belmar.  

In retrospect, there was a peaceful protest shortly after this news conference. Police met this protest with a substantial resistance, including snipers who had guns pointed at unarmed peaceful protesters. This show of force by the Ferguson Police Dept set the stage for this entire travesty of justice. When you show up at a protest expecting violence you, in fact, are self-fulfilling a narrative of seeing the protesters as the enemy.  All the protesters were doing was exercising their rights provided by the U.S. Constitution. When the protesters look at police and see this posture of Robo-cop, the people see these cops not as a protector of the community but the centerpiece of the very institution they are protesting. When you immediately respond in such a manner what you are telling the protesters is you don't have the right to public expression, and we are here to curtail this expression.  

We The People Must Demand Transparency and Accountability from Law-Enforcement. 

One of the significant problems our research found was the demographics of the Ferguson Police Dept, which was a far cry from the demographics of the Ferguson community, and this is prevalent all over the country.  It is critical that the community see itself in the police force they are funding with their tax dollars. Our study into this situation has shown that communities need to see the cops as representations of their ranks; not some ex-military person from who knows where, hired because of some government program to show favoritism over a non-military local applicant from the community. It's imperative that the community sees that the local law-enforcement has a stake in the commonwealth of all the people of the city, town, or nation it is tasked to serve and protect. When a community doesn't see itself reflected in the police force, like in Ferguson, they see these individuals as outsiders imposed upon them. By the same token, when the police officer does not identify with the people from his/her area, it's harder for him to feel a part of that community.

   What human psychology  suggests  is when this situation is self-evident,  people are less likely to see each other as neighbors and more as threats. 

One of the major side-effects of this societal condition is a lack of corporation between citizens and law-enforcement. This situation is dangerous because there is this attitude that if you talk to police you will be labeled a snitch. What is troubling  is that this goes to violent crimes as well as non-violent ones. What is so profound about the fiasco in Ferguson,MO  is that,  not since the killing of students at Kent State University in the 70's,  has the American public witnessed a police show of force that mirrored a military type endeavor on the streets of Baghdad,  by supposedly civic- minded policeman. Throughout our nation's history as a ' rule of thumb,' we have been adverse to using our military for domestic law enforcement. 

      

The business of being a soldier is very different than that of a street cop. What concerns this writer is the fact our military trains soldiers to become killers. What has become evident by the escalating questionable police shootings in America  is that we are putting trained killers on our streets with psychological issues like PTSD, to oversee communities that many do not identify with or relate to, and in some cases loath. A police officer in America is supposed to be a civic-minded civil servant. In fairness, the United States Military has for the longest time held the position of staying out of civil law enforcement and does not want to be involved for the most part. However, this has not stopped them from selling outdated and overstocked military equipment to state and local police agencies. Where the problem festers is with civil law enforcement who have a strong desire to become more like an army. No matter if a cop is an ex-military or a civilian recruit,  when we supply them with war-like equipment, train them in military tactics and tell them they are in some war, it begs the question: what type of mindset are we cultivating?

Our founding fathers were extremely aware of having the military enforce civil law. They got a high dose of it from the British and was one of the main reasons for the American Revolution. This tension came to a head in the Boston Massacre, which ultimately led to the American Rebellion. There are some bottom lines here. Soldiers are trained to kill people,  not protect them. By having individuals with this indoctrination and training now in civilian policing,  what you have is a time bomb and what we see in the here and now is an explosion. What must not get lost is that these killings by cops have become an everyday event, with very few reaching the national media attention as did the Ferguson and New York cases.

In closing, our advocacy here at the House of Public Discourse contends we must reverse these trends we see playing out in our news feeds on a day to day basis. How many more of these police shootings will be tolerated by the American people before the country erupts from civil discourse to civil unrest?  How many more unarmed suspects have to die before we return to some sanity in America where we demand justice for all with a sense of fairness for the everyday citizen? The fact is "We The People" need to take back our government from the corporations who have our elected officials in their hip-pocket. The cops are employees of the people. Our taxes pay for their salaries, equipment, pensions, and in most cases,  health care. I for one,  am sick and tired of my tax dollars going to fund this abhorrent and racist behavior by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. America is in a backward free fall across the board regarding civil rights. America has regressed into a corporation owned fascist government with an attempt to dumb-down this nation by cutting funding for education and having a military police force on stand-by when we as people try to express our rights and express our dissatisfaction through constitutionally protected public discourse. What should make us all emboldened to take action is how "We The People Are Paying For Our Peril!

President Obama Has Taken Some Positive Steps.

Source of Article: Rise of the Warrior Cop by Radley Balko

Don't Vote Don't Bitch, Why Americans Fail To Vote!

Two-Thirds Say Special Interests Control Elections.

 Why do so many registered voters in America fail to vote? In California, a survey was conducted by the California Voter Foundation.[CVF] In a statewide study attitudes on infrequent voters and citizens eligible but unregistered was undertaken. This study was one of the first to shed light on the voter apathy in America.

Voting Takes To Long And I Hate Standing In Long Lines.

Is it not ironic how people will camp overnight to buy a pair of Jordon's or a new IPhone but to exercise one right to vote is too cumbersome.  These same people will not wait 30 minutes to express their vote for prospective government leaders. Does it take to long to vote? What is too long? Based on the House of Public Discourse research into this question revealed this is more an excuse than a reality. [See Article ] 

Just Don't Have The Time.  

The CVF study found that 28% of  "once an awhile." voters and 23% of qualified unregistered voters  claimed they were just too busy to engage in the voting process. CVF President Kim Alexander elaborates,

Kim Alexander

“This tells us that many Californians may benefit from more information about the time-saving advantages of early voting and voting by absentee ballot,” Alexander said. Voter registration forms are available in post offices, libraries and DMV offices."[See Source]

Alexander went on to say that the finding of the CVF study could assist campaigns trying to reach sometimes and no-time voters alike. There is a national opinion that our political process has been overwhelmed by special interest. This perception right or wrong has led to a major barrier regarding voter turn-outs.

Moreover, many participants in this study expressed the view that politicians are corrupt and don't care or speak to their needs. What was a bit jolting for this writer is that these same groups of non-voters to the tune of 93% acknowledged that voting was important.

“Civic duty and self-expression provide strong incentives to get potential voters to the polls, despite pervasive cynicism about the influence of special interests,” said Alexander.

The report also indicated that a friend and more so family dictate and influenced  how many infrequent voters decide their choice.[See Article] Not the daily newspaper, cable news, or political ads.  The family indoctrination more than any other factor was a major reason in determining how a person votes to the tune of 68%. The CVF study also brought to light that door to door political campaigning had little to no effect on these non-voters. 51% of non-voters stated that they grew up in families where politics was seldom discussed. 

Non-Voters are young, single, less educated and likely to be of a minority.[See Source]

• 40% of non-voters are under the age of 30.
• Infrequent voters are much more likely to be married than nonvoters, with 50 percent of infrequent voters married compared to only 34 percent of nonvoters.
• 76% of nonvoters have less than a college degree, compared to 61 percent of infrequent voters and 50 percent of frequent voters.
• Among nonvoters, 54 percent are white or Caucasian compared to 60 percent of infrequent voters and 70 percent of frequent voters.

In closing, fresh off a historic low voter participation election in 2014. Where some agencies report 75% of registered Democratic voters failed to cast a ballot one who did vote could make a point, don't vote, don't bitch. When the Republican legislation starts to unravel Obamacare, and millions lose their health coverage don't bitch. When Republicans and the aforementioned special interest groups reduce welfare, and other social safety net programs don't bitch. When the vulture capitalist does away with regulatory safeguards to our environment don't bitch. When Republicans cut the taxes of the wealthy off the backs of the middle-class, don't bitch. When right-wing radical extremist Christian zealots dumb down our education by denying scientific facts don't bitch. When Republicans cut your medicare, and social security benefits don't bitch. When the right-wing military industrial complex pushes for wars around the globe and your son and daughters and grandchildren are killed and wounded by the thousands don't bitch. Lastly, when the Republican Party's economic policies drives this country back into the ditch bank, it was in the last time they held power if you did not vote which is  your only real  means of meaningful direct protest to these issues don't bitch. [Source: Johnny Hill, Author of House of Public Discourse]

Can Capitalism and Democracy Coexist?

Journalist Chris Hedges interviews political philosopher Sheldon Wolin, who says democracy requires continuous opposition and vigilance by the citizenry.