The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.

Sunday, July 9, 2017

The Failed Electoral College (And Our Failing President)

Image result for electoral college
A failed process (system) which is outdated and flawed considering modern technology

History dot com
has an archived piece about the US electoral process. The article is a good summary of a process which was modified by the Constitutional 12th Amendment. After the fall 2016 General election, it seems the electoral process needs another even more detailed review.

In the second paragraph of the piece Summary, one sentence stands out and places a strain on the perception the electoral system is working as Amended in 1804 (12th Amendment). 

In each presidential election year, a group of candidates for elector is nominated by political parties and other groupings in each state, usually at a state party convention, or by the party state committee. It is these elector-candidates, rather than the presidential and vice presidential nominees, for whom the people vote in the November election, which is held on Tuesday after the first Monday in November. In most states, voters cast a single vote for the slate of electors pledged to the party presidential and vice presidential candidates of their choice. The slate winning the most popular votes is elected; this is known as the winner-take-all, or general ticket, system.

What is wrong with the picture?  The picture clearly states the current Electoral process is driven by the popular vote.  Yes, or course, we think we are voting for a single candidate (President and Vice Presidential ticket) while actually voting for electors. The statement drives a critical question.

Why is the popular vote used to elect electors, in the modern America, if the popular vote isn't settled until approximately three to four weeks after election night?  Another critical question, are we to believe in 1804 votes were counted by midnight on the election day? While election days and dates were set to accommodate rural agricultural farmers via periods of less crop activity, I find it impossible to believe there was consideration of what was to come via TV and digital technology.  

The 12th Amendment included a change in how (the basis for) electors cast their votes.  Good policy is very much the result of time proven need for change.  After of a decade and a half (post-Constitutional ratification) does the rational person not believe those same 1804 change agents wouldn't have developed process change regarding the electronic influences on our current elections. How is it rational (and credible) to have Wolf Blitzer John King (CNN) and Steve Kornacki (MSNBC) on camera reporting state win declarations based on backroom production geeks who declare wins which are more often than not isn't the actual final vote count? Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 2.84 million votes. 

How is that reality an indication of a fair and credible voting process? How is it possible the former leading 
 internationally democracy (the USA) can settle into a presidency of a person who did not win the popular vote? A vote which History dot com indicates via its verbiage has electors considering the final vote.  

No comments :

Post a Comment