[antidemoncrat]

If they discounted the illegal votes cast in 2016, Hillary probably didn’t win the popular vote.

[Dixie Yooper]

Every time there is a National Census, The House of Representatives and The Electoral College gets reformed.

[libertylover]

The best way to understand the purpose of the Electoral College is to look at the county-by-county voting in the 2016 presidential election. The Founding Fathers wanted the president to elected from a broad consensus of citizens, not a narrow-minded mob. Someone please post the map.

[zencycler]

“... against the wishes of the majority of American voters”.

The founders did not trust Democracy. That’s why they created a Republic AND the EC, with checks on all types of tyranny, including the tyranny of the majority.

Originally, citizens did not vote for President, or Senators, which got decided by state legislatures. Only the House was set up to reflect a national majority.

Constructionally, nothing has changed at the federal level for presidential elections - which still get decided by state legislatures. The only change has been that every state delegated that decision to its resident voters.

Which is why there still is no national popular vote for president. That is a fiction. On Election Day you vote for president is being done more as a state resident to represent your sovereign state than as a US citizen, which is a secondary qualifier. So there are 50+ separate presidential elections on that day, as each state rallies its citizen residents to help it decide how to exercise its constitutional power to decide who will lead our Republic for the next four years.

Accumulating the totals of those elections is really no different than accumulating the total votes for Governors by political party, and then wondering why we have more GOP governors if most people voted for Democrats. Both should be viewed as equally ridiculous and irrelevant.

The only reason any confusion exists is because teachers spend too much time pushing progressive propaganda rather than properly teaching our kids about history and civics.

[chief lee runamok]

What a surprising opinion coming from a heavily democrat party state.

[bkopto]

The controversial way America elects presidents

The Rats try to "controversialize" everything when it is in their power-grabbing interest to do so.

"Reform", huh? Like when electing senators was "reformed"?

The Rats use wizard words to pry open their social oysters.

[dead]

The Constitutional Amendment process is very understandable. Go for it, leftists.

You're task is to convince the people in three fourths of the states to nullify their own vote and let NYC and California elect their president.

[loveliberty2]

Given the complex and critical provisions for liberty of individuals and restrictions on power in government, the Electoral College provision can be seen as another Constitutional protection to be treasured.

The Constitutional Structure For Limited And Balanced Government

The Constitution was devised with an ingenious and intricate built-in system of checks and balances to guard the people's liberty against combinations of government power. It structured the Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary separate and wholly independent as to function, but coordinated for proper operation, with safeguards to prevent usurpation of power. Only by balancing each against the other two could freedom be preserved, said John Adams. Another writer of the day summarized clearly the reasons for such checks and balances:

• "If the LEGISLATIVE and JUDICIAL powers are united, the MAKER of the law will also INTERPRET it (constitutionality).
• Should the EXECUTIVE and LEGISLATIVE powers be united... the EXECUTIVE power would make itself absolute, and the government end in tyranny.
• Should the EXECUTIVE and JUDICIAL powers be united, the subject (citizen) would then have no permanent security of his person or property."

"INDEED, the dependence of any of these powers upon either of the others ... has so often been productive of such calamities... that the page of history seems to be one continued tale of human wretchedness." (Theophilus Parsons, ESSEX RESULTS)

What were some of these checks and balances believed so important to individual liberty? Several are listed below:

• HOUSE (peoples representatives) is a check on SENATE - no statute becomes law without its approval.
• SENATE is a check on HOUSE - no statute becomes law without its approval. (Prior to 17th Amendment, SENATE was appointed by State legislatures as a protection for states' rights - another check the Founders provided.)
• EXECUTIVE (President) can restrain both HOUSE and SENATE by using Veto Power.
• LEGISLATIVE (Congress - Senate & House) has a check on EXECUTIVE by being able to pass, with 2/3 majority, a bill over President's veto.
• LEGISLATIVE has a further check on EXECUTIVE through power of discrimination in appropriation of funds for operation of EXECUTIVE.
• EXECUTIVE (President) must have approval of SENATE in filling important posts in EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
• EXECUTIVE (President) must have approval of SENATE before treaties with foreign nations can be effective.
• LEGISLATIVE (Congress) can conduct investigations of EXECUTIVE to see if funds are properly expended and laws enforced.
• EXECUTIVE has a further check on members of LEGISLATIVE (Congress) in using discretionary powers in decisions regarding establishment of military bases, building & improvement of navigable rivers, dams, interstate highways, etc., in districts of those members.
• JUDICIARY is a check on LEGISLATIVE through its authority to review all laws and determine their constitutionality.
• LEGISLATIVE (Congress) has restraining power over JUDICIARY, with con­stitutional authority to restrict extent of its jurisdiction.
• LEGISLATIVE has power to impeach members of JUDICIARY guilty of treason, high crimes, or misdemeanors.
• EXECUTIVE (President) is a check on JUDICIARY by having power to nominate new judges.
• LEGISLATIVE (Senate) is a check on EXECUTIVE and JUDICIARY having power to approve/disapprove nominations of judges.
• LEGISLATIVE is a check on JUDICIARY - having control of appropriations for operation of federal court system.
• LEGISLATIVE (Peoples Representatives) is a check on both EXECUTIVE and JUDICIARY through power to initiate amendments to Constitution subject to approval by 3/4 of the States.
• LEGISLATIVE (Senate) has power to impeach EXECUTIVE (President) with concurrence of 2/3, of members.
• The PEOPLE, through their State representatives, may restrain the power of the federal LEGISLATURE if 3/4 of the States do not ratify proposed Constitu­tional Amendments.
• LEGISLATIVE, by Joint Resolution, can terminate certain powers granted to EXECUTIVE (President) (such as war powers) without his consent.
• It is the PEOPLE who have the final check on both LEGISLATIVE and EX­ECUTIVE when they vote on their Representatives every 2 years, their Senators every 6 years, and their President every 4 years. Through those selections, they also influence the potential makeup of the JUDICIARY.

It is up to each generation to see that the integrity of the Constitutional structure for a free society is maintained by carefully preserving the system of checks and balances essential to limited and balanced government. "To preserve them (is) as necessary as to institute them," said George Washington.

---

Footnote: Our Ageless Constitution, W. David Stedman & La Vaughn G. Lewis, Editors (Asheboro, NC, W. David Stedman Associates, 1987) Part III:  ISBN 0-937047-01-5

[Jim Noble]

The only reform I am interested in is eliminating the popular vote.

The electoral college is fine.

[MarMema]

From the city who can’t figure out how to get human feces off of their streets.

[shanover]

Eliminate 2A and Electoral College and America as founded is eliminated. That is the goal of the left. They will never give up.

[dead]

[LibertyOh]

This whole argument that the rules should be changed because some recent elections would have been different if the rules were different is fallacious. If the rules were different, the campaigns would have been different. Trump would have campaigned heavily in NY and CA, and likely swayed or at least inspired a lot more to vote for him in those states where many simply didn’t vote because they knew it didn’t matter. No one knows what the result would have been under different rules.

[Political Junkie Too]

One way to "change the Electoral College" would be to change the census to only count voting-eligible people and ignore resident aliens as required in the 14th amendment.

That would give the states with fewer non-citizens more power in the Electoral College.

-PJ

[Vaduz]

Democrats hate the electoral college it’s to hard to jimmy but keep working at it.

[joshua c]

The states elect the president. This is another attempt to make turn the United States into the Feudal States.

The Federal income tax and the direct election of Senators neutered the States. Now they are trying to finish the job.

[Mr.Unique]

 

... twice in the last five elections put presidents into office against the wishes of the majority of American voters.

False.

[yuleeyahoo]

The only reform we need is to stop counting non-citizens for representational and electoral purposes. If we did this, the blue state cabal would lose 20%-30% of their political and electoral clout.

[MortMan]

This mechanism solved two problems of 1789’s America that no longer plague the nation.

The disparity of population between states is still a very relevant problem. The Seattle Times is full of sheepdip.

[rxsid]

They've already shredded the "natural born Citizen" mandate in the Constitution (a significant reason why our country is in the mess it is right now)...so they will continue to try and chip away at the foundations of our constitution, and country.

They will likely succeed in the next generation or two, unless there is a literal revival of understanding our history, what is in our constitution and why it's in there and that we must always fight to protect it. There is no time off.

...A republic, if you can keep it.