Rosencrantz & Guildenstern, Ltd.

Archive for the ‘reposts’ Category

(or Why the Electoral College Works and Why the National Popular Vote “Movement” is a Sham)

Originally posted at DeTocqueville.US: http://www.detocqueville.us/2010/08/why-the-electoral-college-works/

I suppose it should come as no surprise given their love of centralized control, that many liberals have been recently calling for a national, popular election for president rather than the current Electoral College system.  But this recent trend is a great example of how little people understand the Constitution as well as how little respect for it the Left really has.

Six states have already passed measures that would bypass the constitutionally-mandated Electoral College system.  Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick had this to say when he signed the measure into law earlier this week:

“I am proud to join other states in this effort to bring more voters and more states into the presidential campaign process,” the Democratic governor said in a statement. “Voter participation in all 50 states is critical to the strength of our democracy and the national popular vote movement will bring more voters into the fold and ensure that every vote counts.”

from http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/08/mass_governor_p.html

There are several fallacies in Gov. Patrick’s statement, but let’s first examine why the Electoral College exists before we get into those problems.

One of the key issues at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was how to maintain the balance between the big-population states and the small-population states.  The Great Compromise was the solution to this in the Legislative branch.  This created a bicameral legislature composed of a House of Representatives that would be based on population (thus pleasing large states like Virginia and New York) and a Senate with two members appointed from each state regardless of size (thus pleasing small states like Georgia and Rhode Island).  It should be clear why such a compromise was necessary (as well as why the debate prior to this was so heated and took so long).  The large states didn’t want their citizens deprived of influence by being lumped together with the same representatives as a small state, but the small states didn’t want to join into a union that would roll over all of their concerns by majority rule.

This illustrates two of the foundation principles of the Constitution: majority rule with minority rights and federalism.  What many people may not understand is that the Electoral College also protects these very same principles by ensuring that the president was not chosen by a popular vote but by an Electoral College.  The members of the Electoral College are chosen by the state legislatures, and the numbers correspond to the number of Senators and Representatives each state has in Congress.

It should be pointed out that according to the Constitution:

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.

This means that technically, these states are well within their rights to decide to throw their electors to the national popular vote winner, but constitutionality does not mean this is a good thing to do.  So to illustrate that let’s look at the problems with Gov. Patrick’s statement.

First, he says that “this [is an] effort to bring more voters and more states into the presidential campaign process.”  This statement is historically inaccurate; the Electoral College system, in fact, ensures that presidential candidates cannot ignore small states.  I know some of us in large states (I’m in Texas) lament the amount of attention lavished on Iowa and New Hampshire during the presidential primary season.  However, a popular vote model (even with the facade of the Electoral College) would encourage candidates to ignore low-population states in favor of area of high-population density.  The effect of this would be the opposite of what Gov. Patrick states.

Second, he says “the national popular vote movement will bring more voters into the fold and ensure that every vote counts.”  Again, this is fallacious on several levels.  As stated above, the Electoral College system avoids marginalizing the concerns of small states (there’s that protection of minority rights), but still gives each state representation based on population with the number of electoral votes per state (there’s majority rule).  Thus, each vote still counts and areas of the country that aren’t California and New York are still considered, are still important.  The Electoral College system already does what Gov. Patrick claims a national system would do.

Finally, let’s look at the method by which these six states are trying to “bring more voters into the fold and ensure that every vote counts,” because it is here that the great lie to this national popular vote “movement” can be found.  These states have decided that they will pledge their electors to support the winner of the popular vote.  The effect of this is not to give each vote equal measure, but to actually disenfranchise voters in those states.  For example, if Candidate A receives more of the popular vote nationally, but Candidate B receives more of the popular vote in the state, Massachusetts’s electors would go not to the candidate that her voters chose (Candidate B) but to Candidate A.

How does disregarding the voters in your state “ensure that every vote counts”?!  This is ridiculous sophistry, and Gov. Patrick (as well as the other governors who signed similar measures) has done his fellow citizens a great disservice: he has taken their voice and shackled it to the national sentiment, regardless of how they vote.

If these states and others really wanted a popular-vote system that actually represented their voters, they would pledge their electors in a proportional model, not this sham.  Instead they show their true intentions by disenfranchising voters while claiming to do the opposite.  We already have a model that does what they claim to do; let’s let it work for us.

This article marks the last of the reposts from the old R&G, Ltd. site.  I intend to continue this series, by the way, and post reviews of the next two books in the Martian Trilogy by Edgar Rice Burroughs. – duane

August 5, 2007
Review – A Princess of Mars
Filed under: Literature, SciFi/Fantasy — duane @ 7:26 am

Edgar Rice Burroughs is better known outside of scifi and fantasy circles as the creator of Tarzan, but like many writers during the pulp era, he wrote in several different genres. In scifi, his principle contribution has been Barsoom novels, which contributed to a genre of pulp fiction known as “sword and planet” stories. While these type of stories are often called science fiction, they have more in common with fantasy; what little science they contain is very fuzzy and is basically magic in scientific trappings. Read the rest of this entry »

August 14, 2007
Catch Me if You Can and The Aviator
Filed under: Movies — duane @ 9:13 pm

My wife, Jen, and I recently watched a couple of DiCaprio movies that we had gotten in from NetFlix. Normally I would post a review of each of these movies separately, but since I’m not sure that I’ll actually watch these again anytime soon, I thought I would just get some of my thoughts down about each movie.

The first one we watched was Catch Me if You Can, which is based on the real-life Frank Abegnale, Jr., a teenager-turned-con-artist and forger. I have actually seen the real episode of To Tell the Truth that the movie opens with, so it was kinda cool to see it briefly with DiCaprio. The story is even more amazing given that it’s based on a true on; sure, there were certain liberties that were taken with it, but the idea of a teenager successfully impersonating an airline pilot, a doctor, and a lawyer, all while forging checks was really interesting. Read the rest of this entry »

August 11, 2007
Adventures in Bad Sci-Fi – Bloodsuckers
Filed under: Movies, SciFi/Fantasy, bad scifi — duane @ 5:44 pm

I have always had a love/hate relationship with the SciFi Channel. For a sf/fantasy fan like myself, the concept is awesome. Unfortunately, throughout the years the execution has often left a lot to be desired. While one would think I would watch the channel a lot, the truth is I don’t. I haven’t cared for most of their original series, and even those with a premise I liked (such as Eureka) I just haven’t been that compelled to watch. And for every step they take forward, they always take at least one back. For example, it’s cool that they’re showing the new Doctor Who, but then they also show ECW wrestling, which has, as far as I can tell, no connection to scifi, fantasy, or horror.

With that said, one of the things I love about the SciFi Channel is one that I should probably hate: original SciFi Channel movies. These come in two types: mediocre movies that are neither good nor bad, and therefore are incredibly boring (such as Dark Prince: The True Story of Dracula, which I was going to review after this one, but just wasn’t interesting enough), or they are so incredibly bad that, as the cliché goes, they circle back around to good again. Thus, every Saturday and Sunday (when I remember), I check out the program guide for potentially bad scifi, fantasy, or horror movies.

Bloodsuckers, also known as Vampire Wars: Battle for the Universe, is one of these movies. Read the rest of this entry »

August 1, 2007
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Filed under: Literature, SciFi/Fantasy — duane @ 8:34 pm

I’ve talked about Harry Potter before, so it should be no secret that I’m a big fan. It’s also no secret that that last book in the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, was going to be a good book. We know by now that Rowling is a good writer, that she has created interesting characters, and that the story-line is compelling. And the majority of people already know if they’re interested in Harry Potter or not; while some people may have been waiting for the series to end before reading it, and others may pick it up later, a review of Deathly Hallows is not likely to inspire anyone to read it. I’m therefore just going to make a few comments about it, and save any potential spoilers for a larger article on the series as a whole. Read the rest of this entry »