Posted on 12/18/2016 10:32:34 AM PST by Kaslin
I’m sick about hearing about these electors having some sacred duty to look at the candidates suitability for office. They’re nothing but party hacks being rewarded for good service to their party. Look at that loser from Texas, it’s not like they’re picked for honesty, integrity or anything. In fact, before this election, has anyone known the name of any elector. The states should allow the removal of an elector for any purpose the winning party chooses, and the state legislature should have the ability to remove an elector during the college if they don’t vote by the law.
Wrong. There is no Constitutional requirement that Electors vote any certain way. States can and some do have laws binding them to voting as the populace of the state has voted but they can change their votes if they are willing to accept the legal consequences. The federal government and the federal courts have no jurisdiction here. If an Elector seems likely to vote contrary to his instructions his state legislature can replace him up to the last moment. There is no requirement that there be a popular vote for President. Each state legislature is tasked with appointing a slate of Electors to the number of Congressional Representatives and Senators representing that state. The Legislature decides how those Electors are to be chosen. The power to choose Constitutionally mandated Electors resides in the States and mixing in the Federal Government is a further centralization and a further diminution of the States.
They, the people, have no control of how the electors are to vote. Their influence is in choosing Electors who are of like mind with themselves who will then use their best judgment to vote for a Candidate. The Founders did not envision the President to be chosen by popular vote. The task of selecting the President is given in the Constitution to the Legislatures. The legislatures have all chosen to make their choice by allowing the citizenry to vote for the electors instead of choosing them in the legislature. Choosing the President was envisioned as a function of the Sovereign States, not of the general citizenry and certainly not of the many foreigners who take part in our presidential elections.
The electors were NOT supposed to be the “final voice of the people. The state legislatures were assigned the responsibility of choosing Electors. The legislatures have chosen to allow the citizenry to vote for Electors but it is the State legislatures who Constitutionally choose the Electors. Once long ago the Founders set up a system of Federated Sovereign States, not a mass democracy.
I guess I meant the last bastion against angry mob.
Exactly
Each state should have laws that the electors have to vote the way their state did. At least that way no one could claim electors have the legal right to ignore the election and vote however they care, as so many on the left are doing now.
It’s easy get rid of scum sucking America hating communist democrats who have destroyed every traditional institution in the country
They protect the Republic from the tyranny of California, Illinois, New York and majority rule.
No they don't, the constitutional allocation of the electoral college votes does that. The electors are no longer necessary as the states could just certify who won their electoral votes at the same time they certify the popular vote. No reason to have a bunch of individuals going through the motion of casting electoral votes that have already been determined by the voters in each state.
Listing state by state of the Electoral College Electors
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3506042/posts
The legislatures can swap out electors right up to the vote. Once the vote is taken, though, that’s it.
I mistook you point. The actual formality of the gathering to vote weeks after the election is indeed un-necessary. The electoral system is absolutely necessary.
Nonetheless, the electors will continue to meet in their respective capital cities every four years to cast their electoral votes.
It will require a constitutional amendment to eliminate the practice.
And, somehow, I don't think that's gonna happen...
Which is why I opened my remarks with this is comment #14.
I guess it would take a constitutional amendment, but I think we should just eliminate the electors from the presidential general election process.
It might be possible to eliminate the electors since, if one takes a close look at it, they serve no purpose. As I read that section of the constitution, the electors only vote once and if that one vote does not choose the president and VP, it immediately goes to the House.
But serving no real purpose might make it more trouble than it is worth to try and change it, unless at some point the electors did defy, or almost defy the will of the voters. It was just a lot of whining and moaning from the sore losers this year that had no real support.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.