Skip to comments.
Feinstein and Chafee want to abolish Electoral College
The Providence Journal ^
| 1/6/05
| Scott McKay
Posted on 01/06/2005 7:06:55 AM PST by EA_Man
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
To: EA_Man
This makes it bi-partisan.
To: Luddite Patent Counsel
"The [electoral] system was erected by the men who founded the United States in 1789 because they did not trust average citizens."
So the average citizen in 2004 is to be trusted with his evaluation of how to vote? Want to see what that theory is worth on Skid Row in Chicago where you can buy a vote for a cheap bottle of booze, a night out with all expenses paid for welfare Moms, an open bar for the entire neighborhood at the pub on the corner, or a $50 downpayment on a "new"
car?
Boxer....get real!
62
posted on
01/06/2005 7:46:27 AM PST
by
Grendel9
To: econ_grad
Why the heck did they name this country the United STATES anyway? The EC is one of the most brilliant of the checks and balances.
63
posted on
01/06/2005 7:47:55 AM PST
by
Lekker 1
To: massgopguy
It would take the 37 states that have 10 or less Electoral Votes to pass an Amendment that would disenfranchise themselves. Also while I am not a Constitutional scholar, maybe if Ann C. is trolling she could confirm this, but since the Electoral College is set in the Articles, are they not sacrosanct?While I am not Ann Coulter, I can answer your question: Article IV, section 4 of the United States Constitution guarantees to the states a republican form of government. What these two morons are proposing would turn us into a vile and dangerous democracy, which we are not and never have been. The word 'democracy' is never mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution, and our Founding Fathers stated quite plainly that it would be a direct threat to our liberty. The article linked to Walter Williams' name on Drudge discusses this.
64
posted on
01/06/2005 7:50:02 AM PST
by
HenryLeeII
(Democrats have helped kill more Americans than the Soviets and Nazis combined!)
To: EA_Man
Do away with the EC and watch the union dissolve!
65
posted on
01/06/2005 7:52:53 AM PST
by
RAY
(They that do right are all heroes!)
To: EA_Man
The system was erected by the men who founded the United States in 1789 because they did not trust average citizens. Voting was restricted to white males who owned property.These two sentences show just how ignorant this writer, notice I didn't say journalist, is. (
a good article on the EC)
While the second sentence is correct it is supposed to give emphasis to the first sentence...in other words, the poorer, landless citizens were those not to be trusted. The
electors were restricted to white males who owned property.
And if you consider the debates of the time that is how it should be. Property owners were more likely to vote for those who were willing to protect their property rights as well as their individual rights. If you had no property you could vote for someone willing to take away those very rights.
Secondly, the EC has changed over time from how it was originally composed so that it isn't anything near to what was initially created. To my understanding there was no popular vote for the POTUS when the EC was established and the legislature voted for electors. Political parties put a damper on that though.
Eliminating the EC would be the final straw that broke the camel's back.
To: HenryLeeII
You hit the nail on the head. "Democracy" is nothing more than a decision-making process. It is not a form of government. And I am quite pleased with the federal republic that we have. We have thrived for over 200 years with this form of government. What makes these clowns think that elimination of the EC would "improve" our form of government. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
67
posted on
01/06/2005 7:58:12 AM PST
by
Lekker 1
To: EA_Man
This would take a Constitutional Amendment and it would never pass.
To: EA_Man
Feinstein and Chafee want to abolish Electoral CollegeOver my dead body.
Literally.
69
posted on
01/06/2005 8:03:21 AM PST
by
Lazamataz
("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" -- harpseal)
To: Grendel9
Of course they trusted average citizens. They distrusted, and rightfully so, average politicians and their parties.
To: philman_36
71
posted on
01/06/2005 8:13:19 AM PST
by
michigander
(The Constitution only guarantees the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.)
To: Lekker 1
What makes these clowns think that elimination of the EC would "improve" our form of government. If it ain't broke don't fix it.Oh, but a real Christian who believes in effective foreign policy and tax cuts won twice, so it must be broke, don'tcha know!
72
posted on
01/06/2005 8:17:41 AM PST
by
HenryLeeII
(Democrats have helped kill more Americans than the Soviets and Nazis combined!)
To: L98Fiero
Actually, the requirement is 3/4ths of the states for ratification of an amendment.
Not a chance in hell of either fraction being reached, of course.
73
posted on
01/06/2005 8:17:52 AM PST
by
SAJ
To: EA_Man
It really wouldn't matter if the federal governemnt and the President followed Constitutional limitations.
No one would get too hacked off over who was running the post office and overseeing the military.
74
posted on
01/06/2005 8:22:58 AM PST
by
Atlas Sneezed
(Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
To: EA_Man
What is more, Chafee said, is that a tie in the Electoral College in a presidential election would push the decision into the House of Representatives, where each state would get one vote. That, Chafee said, would not be a representative system.
Chafee should realize that the House of Representatives is a representative system based on population. Each Representative would get a vote, not each state...
To: SAJ
"Actually, the requirement is 3/4ths of the states for ratification of an amendment."
Oops, my bad. It's gotta pass both houses by a 2/3 vote in each, then to the states for a 3/4 marjority, is that correct? If so, a snowball stands a better chance in Hades. (Some people call it "Hell", I call it "Hades", mmmmm-hm.)
76
posted on
01/06/2005 8:33:19 AM PST
by
L98Fiero
To: Plumrodimus
What is more, Chafee said, is that a tie in the Electoral College in a presidential election would push the decision into the House of Representatives, where each state would get one vote. That, Chafee said, would not be a representative system.
Rephrasing my previous post: Chafee should realize that the House of Representatives is a representative system based on population. Each Representative would get to vote to determine the result of the state's single vote. It's still a combination of popular vote and vote by the states.
To: EA_Man
No surprise that the liberals want to abolish the electoral college. It stand in the way of their power, they think, and their domination over the American people.
Sad to say that the American people have just spoken and not to well of the liberals.
78
posted on
01/06/2005 8:40:07 AM PST
by
sr4402
To: Nataku X
When was the last time a recount worked in GOP's favor?
Florida, 2000.
Ohio, 2004.
79
posted on
01/06/2005 8:41:17 AM PST
by
George Smiley
(The only 180 that Kerry hasn't done is the one that would release ALL his military records.)
To: conservativecorner
In a bipartisan alliance to abolish the Electoral College, Rhode Island Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee... I don't think so!
80
posted on
01/06/2005 8:42:57 AM PST
by
John123
(Good grief! The Palestinians cannot even organize a state funeral!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson