“PRESERVE AND PROTECT…AT ANY COST”
by John Porter, ©2019
(Mar. 20, 2019) — Please, I urge you to take a couple of minutes to read this and forward it far and wide in every way you can.
I have been urged by many to explain the Electoral College vs. popular vote provision of our Constitution and the reasoning behind it (U.S. Constitution, Article 2, section 1, clause 3 and the 12th amendment). Closely analyzed, without biased political-party thinking, it shows the brilliance of the people we call the Founding Fathers in establishing this type of voting system for selecting a president. It is for that one federal government position only, because it is the only government job for which we hire someone with a nationwide election.
We must remind ourselves that when these men met to draft our constitution, there was no federal government, only states with their individual laws. Writing a Constitution was part of the process of forming the federal government. It was done in order to set the powers the states were willing to allow the federal government to have and the ones they would retain, and protect the rights of the people which could not be infringed upon by either.
The original proposal was to have the two branches of Congress together elect the president. However, it was not adopted because that would be conceding power to the federal government to elect the president. It being the only elected position representing all Americans, the states rightfully and successfully argued that they would have no voice in electing the president, and initiated the process at the state and local levels by choosing electors from each state to vote for president. Well-known leading citizens were chosen, originally by state legislatures, now by the voters for the special purpose of selecting the president. The electors would assemble and cast the votes allotted to that state. The number of votes allotted were the state’s number of Representatives and Senators combined. Their model for this was the very structure of the Constitutional Convention itself, where each state had a number of delegates representing that state.
Even though it does not function exactly as the Founders originally intended, the Electoral College remains today an essential constitutional safeguard of not only American individual liberty, but of the liberty of the states from the federal government. As stated, each state is allotted as many electoral votes as it has senators and members of the House of Representatives. To become president of the United States of America, a person must, even today, win the national election state by state. We speak of “the presidential election” when, including Washington D. C., there are actually 51 separate elections for president. The United States is a nation of 50 separate and sovereign states. The Electoral College gives your state a voice in electing the president.
There is much talk to eliminate the Electoral College and elect the president by popular vote. One group is headed up by Eric Holder with the financial support of other liberal progressives, many running for president in 2020, and they are determined to do it. If successful, it would completely transform the office. The person elected to it would in effect become the president of the big cities of America, and the last trace of independent self-government guaranteed the individual states by the Constitution’s system would be lost forever. We must preserve and protect the Electoral College at any cost.
Here I give you an example of what could and would, in fact, have happened on November 8, 2016 if we had a national popular election instead of the Electoral College. This, I hope, will help one understand the true wisdom of the writers of our constitution. These numbers are from the official vote count records tabulated from every voting precinct in America.
The total popular vote count shows Donald Trump won the popular vote in 30 states and Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 20 states plus D.C. The total count for all states for Trump was 62,979,879; for Clinton it was 65,844,954. The difference was Clinton winning the popular vote by 2,865,075. However, totaling all states excluding California, Donald Trump won the popular vote. In California the vote count was Clinton, 8,753,788 and Trump, 4,483,810. Now, let’s deduct Clinton’s California vote from her national vote: 65,844,954 – 8,753,788 = 57,091,166. Now let’s deduct Trump’s California vote from his national vote: 62,979,879 – 4,483,810 = 58,496,069. The difference is Trump winning by 1,404,903.
So, in effect, Hillary Clinton was elected president of California and Donald Trump was elected president of the rest of the country by a substantial margin. This is the finest example I can relate to you of the wisdom of the Electoral College system of electing the American President. It prevents the vote of any one densely-populated state from overriding the vote of all the others. Ask yourself, “Do I really want California, or any other state, electing the president for the rest of us?” Without the Electoral College that is exactly what will happen.
Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.