2008 Woodie Awards
Voting not a waste in 2008
Guest column
Bill Greene, Special to The Carolinian
Issue date: 11/7/06 Section: Opinions
I have to respond to Luke McIntyre's screed, "Don't Waste Time Voting in 2008." Luke, I'm guessing that you aren't really into U.S. history or political science, right? Especially considering your apparent love of "democracy" - which this country was never intended to be (thank God).
Our Framers understood that one-man-one-vote majoritarianism was a formula for absolute tyranny. They loathed the idea and established a safe-guard against such tyranny, called the Electoral College, which has for more than two hundred years struck a wise balance between the rights of the states, the individual, the majority, and the minority in a free nation.
The architecture of the Electoral College established a procedure wherein the Republic's Chief Executive would be chosen by the people as citizens of the States in which they reside. Instead of a single "national" election, there is a separate election in each of the States which constitutes the Republic. In this manner, the President is not the creature of Congress, but an independent force, albeit with actual elements of accountability to the Congress as well as to the States. Moreover, through the Electoral College process, the President is also accountable to We, the People as citizens of each particular State. Because of the Electoral College system, if fraud is detected in a single State's election it does not de-legitimate or poison the total result.
Similarly, the role of the States in choosing the President assures that those who seek the office of chief magistrate will, to a greater degree than would otherwise be the case, pay heed to the varying interests and concerns of the several States.
It is important to note that Electors are chosen in each State in such manner as that State's Legislature may determine. If you want North Carolina's method changed, start a popular campaign to change it in the state. Nowhere in the Constitution is a "popular" election of the President.
In times of crisis, be they the result of war, natural catastrophe, or acts of terrorism, this fact makes it possible to assure continuity of government even if the democratic procedures to which we are accustomed become impractical. Nowhere in the Constitution is it required that a person chosen to serve as Elector exercise anything but his own independent conscience and reasoning in determining for whom his Electoral vote shall be cast. Although penalties may be applied to unfaithful Electors, an Elector may vote for whomever he chooses. Indeed, if, following a popular election prior to the
meeting of the Electors in their State
capitols, the popular vote winner should die or become incapacitated, this free choice by the Electors can be an extremely important factor.
It's unfortunate that you have so misunderstood our Framers' design in the Constitution, and that you would turn our national elections into a French revolutionary mob. I hope others don't follow your lead.
Our Framers understood that one-man-one-vote majoritarianism was a formula for absolute tyranny. They loathed the idea and established a safe-guard against such tyranny, called the Electoral College, which has for more than two hundred years struck a wise balance between the rights of the states, the individual, the majority, and the minority in a free nation.
The architecture of the Electoral College established a procedure wherein the Republic's Chief Executive would be chosen by the people as citizens of the States in which they reside. Instead of a single "national" election, there is a separate election in each of the States which constitutes the Republic. In this manner, the President is not the creature of Congress, but an independent force, albeit with actual elements of accountability to the Congress as well as to the States. Moreover, through the Electoral College process, the President is also accountable to We, the People as citizens of each particular State. Because of the Electoral College system, if fraud is detected in a single State's election it does not de-legitimate or poison the total result.
Similarly, the role of the States in choosing the President assures that those who seek the office of chief magistrate will, to a greater degree than would otherwise be the case, pay heed to the varying interests and concerns of the several States.
It is important to note that Electors are chosen in each State in such manner as that State's Legislature may determine. If you want North Carolina's method changed, start a popular campaign to change it in the state. Nowhere in the Constitution is a "popular" election of the President.
In times of crisis, be they the result of war, natural catastrophe, or acts of terrorism, this fact makes it possible to assure continuity of government even if the democratic procedures to which we are accustomed become impractical. Nowhere in the Constitution is it required that a person chosen to serve as Elector exercise anything but his own independent conscience and reasoning in determining for whom his Electoral vote shall be cast. Although penalties may be applied to unfaithful Electors, an Elector may vote for whomever he chooses. Indeed, if, following a popular election prior to the
meeting of the Electors in their State
capitols, the popular vote winner should die or become incapacitated, this free choice by the Electors can be an extremely important factor.
It's unfortunate that you have so misunderstood our Framers' design in the Constitution, and that you would turn our national elections into a French revolutionary mob. I hope others don't follow your lead.
Be the first to comment on this story